{ "meta": { "exportedAt": "2026-09-22T17:44:23.064Z", "formatVersion": 2, "selection": { "q": "legal-profession", "system": "", "harm": "", "context": "", "country": "", "role": "", "relation": "core", "evidence": "", "year": "", "response": "", "severity": "", "verification": "", "view": "incidents", "sort": "added" }, "totalIncidents": 2, "coverage": { "cases": 2, "countries": 2, "languages": 1, "unknownLocation": 0, "locationPending": 0, "unknownLanguage": 0, "unknownDate": 0, "lawsuits": 0, "regulatory": 2, "minors": 0, "coreRelations": 2, "contextualRelations": 0, "mixedRelations": 0, "unknownRelations": 0, "relationPending": 0, "relationUnknown": 0 }, "countingNote": "Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.", "affectedCountNote": "Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.", "source": "NOPE Incident Tracker", "url": "https://nope.net/incidents", "license": "CC BY 4.0" }, "incidents": [ { "id": "2026-kumar-sdt-strike-off-ai-citations", "caseFacts": { "claims": [ { "id": "c1", "status": "documented", "evidence": [ { "locator": "SDT judgment, Allegation 2.1 findings and the schedule of false/miscited authorities.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" }, { "locator": "RollOnFriday's listing of the bogus citations.", "relation": "context", "source_id": "s4" } ], "assertion": "Allegation 2.1 was found proved: Kumar's 12 March 2026 Answer to the SRA's Rule 12 Statement contained misleading quotations and citations produced with generative AI, including the non-existent 'SRA v Chan [2020] EWHC 1502', the miscited 'SRA v James, MacGregor & Naylor [2018] EWCA Civ 1420' (in reality an IP case) and a misattributed Baxendale-Walker passage.", "causal_attribution": "Directly established by the tribunal's written judgment; trade press accounts are consistent." }, { "id": "c2", "status": "documented", "evidence": [ { "locator": "SDT judgment, Allegation 2.2 findings and the 13 April acceptance.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" } ], "assertion": "Allegation 2.2 was found proved: his 9 April 2026 email admitting AI use was itself AI-drafted and contained further errors, which he accepted on 13 April 2026.", "causal_attribution": "Directly established by the tribunal's written judgment." }, { "id": "c3", "status": "documented", "evidence": [ { "locator": "SDT judgment, sanction and reasoning passages.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" }, { "locator": "Outer Temple's case note confirming the outcome and the 'first SDT case on a lawyer's use of AI' framing.", "relation": "context", "source_id": "s5" } ], "assertion": "On 25 August 2026 the SDT struck Kumar off the Register of Foreign Lawyers with culpability 'very high', stating it would have struck him off on either allegation alone; the tribunal invoked Ayinde v Haringey LBC [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin).", "causal_attribution": "Directly established by the tribunal's written judgment; the 'first AI case' framing comes from the SRA's counsel and is attributed." }, { "id": "c4", "status": "documented", "evidence": [ { "locator": "SDT judgment, conviction allegation and sentence passages.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" }, { "locator": "RollOnFriday's Isleworth Crown Court reference (recorded as a discrepancy; the judgment controls).", "relation": "contradicts", "source_id": "s4" } ], "assertion": "The parallel ground was his 29 January 2024 conviction under s.21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 — recorded by the judgment as at the Central Criminal Court (RollOnFriday says Isleworth Crown Court, a discrepancy) — sentenced on 26 April 2024 to a 12-month community order with 150 hours' unpaid work.", "causal_attribution": "The conviction ground is established by the judgment; the convicting-court discrepancy across outlets is preserved." } ], "effects": [ { "label": "lawyer struck off after AI-generated false citations in his disciplinary defence", "claim_id": "c3", "direction": "negative" } ], "sources": [ { "id": "s1", "url": "https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/12884-2026-Kumar-.pdf", "kind": "tribunal_judgment", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Judgment PDF read on 2026-09-15 (25 Aug 2026): allegations, findings, sanction, panel, and the Ayinde v Haringey invocation.", "independence_group": "sdt" }, { "id": "s2", "url": "https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/lawyer-struck-off-for-using-fake-ai-generated-cases-before-sdt", "kind": "trade_press", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (4 Sep 2026).", "independence_group": "legal-futures" }, { "id": "s3", "url": "https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/foreign-lawyer-produced-ai-generated-false-citations-at-sdt/5127825.article", "kind": "trade_press", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (4 Sep 2026, Hyde).", "independence_group": "law-gazette" }, { "id": "s4", "url": "https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/first-lawyer-struck-ai-addiction", "kind": "trade_press", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (11 Sep 2026). Colour and the specific bogus citations; its 'AI addiction' framing is editorial joking, not a finding.", "independence_group": "rollonfriday" }, { "id": "s5", "url": "https://www.outertemple.com/joshua-hitchens-acts-for-the-sra-in-the-first-solicitors-disciplinary-tribunal-case-on-a-lawyers-use-of-ai/", "kind": "counsel_case_note", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (8 Sep 2026). SRA counsel's chambers' note: case number, dates, judgment link, and the 'first SDT case on a lawyer's use of AI' framing; participant-side account, recorded as such.", "independence_group": "outer-temple" } ], "version": 1, "ai_roles": [ "own_use" ], "contexts": [ "work", "justice" ], "unknowns": [ "The specific generative AI tool is not named in the inspected accounts.", "The convicting court appears as the Central Criminal Court in the judgment and Isleworth Crown Court in RollOnFriday; the judgment controls but the discrepancy is unresolved in the inspected material.", "Whether Kumar seeks to appeal the strike-off is not reported.", "His employment status after the strike-off is not reported; the Law Gazette's employment background predates it." ], "geography": { "basis": "Events: his practice and the SRA proceedings in England. Affected person: Kumar, on the Register of Foreign Lawyers in England and Wales. Court: the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal; the parallel conviction was at the Central Criminal Court (per the judgment; RollOnFriday's Isleworth Crown Court is a recorded discrepancy).", "court_countries": [ "GB" ], "event_countries": [ "GB" ], "affected_person_countries": [ "GB" ] }, "publication": { "basis": "Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an own-use, work-context adverse consequence with tribunal-found AI misconduct and a dated, career-ending sanction. This applies the charter's individual-review rule to the AI-sanction class; a class-level ruling is not required. Kumar is named in a public tribunal judgment; the parallel conviction ground is recorded for completeness and is not used to inflate the AI link. RollOnFriday's 'AI addiction' framing is recorded as editorial joking.", "reviewed_on": "2026-09-15" }, "ai_involvement": { "basis": "Tribunal-found: the 12 March 2026 Answer's misleading quotations and citations were produced with generative AI, and the 9 April 2026 email admitting AI use was itself AI-drafted with further errors (accepted 13 April). The specific tool is not named in the inspected accounts.", "status": "supported" }, "person_relations": [ "communicated_with" ] }, "name": "SDT strikes solicitor Abhishek Kumar off the Register of Foreign Lawyers after AI-generated false citations in his SRA defence", "summary": "On 25 August 2026 the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal struck Abhishek Kumar off the Register of Foreign Lawyers after finding proved that his 12 March 2026 Answer to the SRA's Rule 12 Statement contained misleading quotations and citations produced with generative AI — including a non-existent 'SRA v Chan [2020] EWHC 1502' and a miscited 'SRA v James, MacGregor & Naylor [2018] EWCA Civ 1420' that is actually an intellectual-property case — and that his 9 April 2026 email admitting AI use was itself AI-drafted with further errors. The tribunal said it would have struck him off on that allegation alone; the parallel ground was his January 2024 conviction under s.21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. This is the SDT's first case on a lawyer's use of AI, per the SRA's counsel.", "incidentDate": "2026-03-12", "incidentEndDate": "2026-08-25", "incidentKind": "bounded_series", "incidentDatePrecision": "range", "exposurePattern": "repeated_interactions", "reportedDate": "2026-09-04", "aiSystem": "Generative AI (tool not named in inspected accounts)", "aiCompany": "Unknown", "severity": "high", "verificationStatus": "verified", "harmCategories": [], "harmOutcomes": [ "professional_harm", "legal_harm" ], "harmOutcomeSummary": "Career-ending professional consequence for the lawyer who submitted AI-generated false citations in his own disciplinary defence: struck off the Register of Foreign Lawyers on 25 August 2026, with culpability rated 'very high'.", "frameworkFacets": [], "causationStatus": "established", "participantUsersAffectedMin": 1, "otherPeopleHarmedMin": 0, "affectedCountStatus": "exact", "affectedCountEvidence": "One documented harmed person: Kumar himself, the AI user struck off (SDT judgment). No client or third-party harm is reported in the inspected sources and none is counted.", "victimAgeRange": "adult", "jurisdiction": "GB", "platformType": "other", "outcomeType": "regulatory_action", "outcomeStatus": "resolved", "primarySourceUrl": "https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/12884-2026-Kumar-.pdf", "primarySourceLabel": "Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal judgment, SRA Ltd v Abhishek Kumar, Case No. 12884-2026 (25 Aug 2026)", "firstPublishedAt": "2026-09-15T06:18:05.203137+00:00", "scopeVersion": "facts-v3", "tags": [ "work", "justice", "legal-profession", "strike-off", "fabricated-citations", "sdt", "own-use", "uk" ] }, { "id": "2026-aarons-chatgpt-fabricated-testimony-sanction", "caseFacts": { "claims": [ { "id": "c1a", "status": "corroborated", "evidence": [ { "locator": "Order passages quoted by Ars: contempt, $5,000 to the Client Protection Fund in 30 days, referral.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" }, { "locator": "Reuters wire: 'on Sept 9' — fine, contempt, referral, and the Sandoval caption.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s2" }, { "locator": "ABA Journal, 24 Aug: the $5,000 contempt anticipated from the 21 Aug show-cause hearing (pre-order; advance reporting, context only).", "relation": "context", "source_id": "s3" } ], "assertion": "By written order of 9 September 2026, the New Mexico Supreme Court held Stephen Aarons in direct contempt, fined him $5,000 payable to the State Bar Client Protection Fund within 30 days, and referred him to the disciplinary board.", "causal_attribution": "The contempt, fine and referral are quoted by Ars Technica and confirmed by the Reuters wire; the ABA Journal's hearing-day account anticipated but could not confirm the later written order. The order PDF itself was not retrieved in this review." }, { "id": "c1b", "status": "reported", "evidence": [ { "locator": "Ars: removal, bar pending referral, briefs struck, reassignment (Kim Chavez Cook appointed 2 Sep).", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" } ], "assertion": "The order also removed Aarons from the case, barred him from appearing before the court pending the disciplinary-board referral, struck the filed briefs and reassigned the appeal to the public defender (Kim Chavez Cook, appointed 2 September 2026).", "causal_attribution": "Single-chain detail from Ars Technica's account of the order; the Reuters wire does not carry these elements." }, { "id": "c2", "status": "corroborated", "evidence": [ { "locator": "Ars passages: Rev.com transcript plus record into ChatGPT (o3); the named fabricated witnesses and false attributions; the admission of non-verification.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" }, { "locator": "ABA Journal: 'admits stupidity over AI errors' at the show-cause hearing.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s3" }, { "locator": "Reuters headline account: 'ChatGPT invented fake police testimony in murder appeal, New Mexico high court says'.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s2" } ], "assertion": "Aarons used ChatGPT (OpenAI o3) on a Rev.com transcript and the case record to draft the brief, which contained fabricated witnesses and testimony — officers 'Michelle Amarillo' and 'Sanchez', Manal Al-Jibury, Teresa Marquez, and false testimony attributed to Danny and Linda Stanton and Mariah Chavez — and misdescribed real precedents; he admitted at the hearing that he had not verified the output.", "causal_attribution": "The fabrication and the admission are established by the attorney's own statements at the hearing and the court's findings as reported; no source reports a denial." }, { "id": "c3", "status": "reported", "evidence": [ { "locator": "Ars: substitution of the public defender (Kim Chavez Cook, appointed 2 Sep); the court's remark about the client.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" } ], "assertion": "The client, Oscar Renee Sandoval, suffers a delayed appeal: the briefs were struck, Aarons was removed, and the public defender was substituted (appointed 2 September 2026); the court told Aarons 'your client is the one suffering'.", "causal_attribution": "Single-chain detail from Ars Technica's account of the order; the delay's length is not stated." }, { "id": "c4", "status": "reported", "evidence": [ { "locator": "Reuters wire via Straits Times: Sandoval caption, life sentence February 2025, Doña Ana County.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s2" }, { "locator": "Ars: brief filed ~Aug 2025; State's motion to strike weeks later.", "relation": "supports", "source_id": "s1" } ], "assertion": "The underlying case is the murder appeal of Oscar Renee Sandoval, sentenced to life in February 2025 in Doña Ana County for killing his partner Shiereen Al-Jibury; the brief was filed around August 2025 and the State moved to strike weeks later.", "causal_attribution": "Background context, attributed to the wire and Ars; the docket number was not confirmed in this review." } ], "effects": [ { "label": "attorney sanctioned for ChatGPT-fabricated testimony; client's appeal delayed", "claim_id": "c1a", "direction": "negative" } ], "sources": [ { "id": "s1", "url": "https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/09/chatgpt-using-lawyer-punished-for-citing-fake-testimony-from-made-up-witnesses/", "kind": "news_report", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (11 Sep 2026, Brodkin). Quotes the 9 September order and the 21 August hearing; names the fabricated witnesses.", "independence_group": "ars" }, { "id": "s2", "url": "https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/chatgpt-invented-fake-police-testimony-in-murder-appeal-new-mexico-high-court-says", "kind": "wire_report", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (11 Sep 2026); Straits Times carrying the Reuters wire.", "independence_group": "reuters" }, { "id": "s3", "url": "https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/criminal-defense-attorney-admits-stupidity-over-ai-errors-but-still-receives-sharp-rebuke-from-his-states-high-court", "kind": "trade_press", "access": "read", "language": "en", "translation_note": "Read in English on 2026-09-15 (24 Aug 2026). Post-hearing report citing the Santa Fe New Mexican; the fine and contempt were anticipated from the hearing, not yet the written order.", "independence_group": "aba-journal" } ], "version": 1, "ai_roles": [ "own_use" ], "contexts": [ "work", "justice" ], "unknowns": [ "The 9 September 2026 order PDF was not directly inspected (nmcourts.gov search empty; form-based case lookup); the claims about it rest on two chains quoting it.", "The underlying docket number is unconfirmed.", "The disciplinary-board process and its outcome are pending.", "The full set of fabricated or misdescribed citations beyond the named examples is not reported.", "The ChatGPT product tier and whether the firm had verification policies are not reported." ], "geography": { "basis": "Events: Santa Fe, New Mexico practice and the Doña Ana County murder case. Affected persons: the attorney and his client, both in New Mexico. Court: New Mexico Supreme Court.", "court_countries": [ "US" ], "event_countries": [ "US" ], "affected_person_countries": [ "US" ] }, "publication": { "basis": "Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an own-use, work-context adverse consequence with a dated, quantified sanction and an admitted, judicially found AI link. This applies the charter's individual-review rule to the AI-sanction class; the retired ordinary_task_failure gate and a class-level ruling are not required. Aarons is a public officer of the court sanctioned by a public order and is named; his client's name appears in the public caption of the appeal. In a 2026-09-15 second pass the original compound first claim was split: the corroborated contempt/fine/referral stand as c1a, and the Ars-only order elements (removal, bar, struck briefs, reassignment) stand as reported c1b. person_relations recorded in the same pass.", "reviewed_on": "2026-09-15" }, "ai_involvement": { "basis": "The AI link is admitted and judicially found: Aarons fed a Rev.com transcript and the record into ChatGPT (OpenAI o3), and the court's order addresses the fabricated content in the filed brief; he admitted at the show-cause hearing that he had not verified the output.", "status": "supported" }, "person_relations": [ "communicated_with" ] }, "name": "New Mexico Supreme Court fines attorney Stephen Aarons $5,000 and removes him from a murder appeal over ChatGPT-fabricated testimony", "summary": "Santa Fe defense attorney Stephen Aarons used ChatGPT (OpenAI's o3) on a Rev.com transcript and the record to draft briefing in the murder appeal of Oscar Renee Sandoval; the brief contained fabricated witnesses and testimony (including police officers 'Michelle Amarillo' and 'Sanchez' and invented testimony attributed to real people) and misdescribed real precedents. After a 21 August 2026 show-cause hearing at which Aarons admitted he had not verified the output, the New Mexico Supreme Court's written order of 9 September 2026 held him in direct contempt, fined him $5,000 payable to the State Bar Client Protection Fund within 30 days, removed him from the case, barred him from appearing before the court pending a disciplinary-board referral, struck the filed briefs and reassigned the appeal to the public defender.", "incidentDate": "2025-08-01", "incidentEndDate": "2026-09-09", "incidentKind": "bounded_series", "incidentDatePrecision": "range", "exposurePattern": "single_interaction", "reportedDate": "2026-08-24", "aiSystem": "ChatGPT (OpenAI o3)", "aiCompany": "OpenAI", "severity": "medium", "verificationStatus": "credible", "harmCategories": [], "harmOutcomes": [ "professional_harm", "legal_harm", "financial_loss" ], "harmOutcomeSummary": "A dated, quantified professional sanction for the attorney who relied on ChatGPT's output: $5,000 fine, direct-contempt finding, removal from the case, a bar on appearing before the court pending a disciplinary-board referral, and struck briefs; his client's appeal is delayed as a result.", "frameworkFacets": [], "causationStatus": "established", "participantUsersAffectedMin": 1, "otherPeopleHarmedMin": 1, "affectedCountStatus": "exact", "affectedCountEvidence": "Two documented harmed people. The user: Aarons, sanctioned (court order reported by Ars Technica and Reuters). Another person's use consequence: his client Sandoval, whose appeal is delayed by the struck briefs and the substitution of counsel (Ars quotes the court's 'your client is the one suffering'). No further harmed persons are reported; the victim's family is not counted (no harm to them is reported).", "victimAgeRange": "adult", "jurisdiction": "US", "platformType": "assistant", "outcomeType": "regulatory_action", "outcomeStatus": "resolved", "primarySourceUrl": "https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/09/chatgpt-using-lawyer-punished-for-citing-fake-testimony-from-made-up-witnesses/", "primarySourceLabel": "Ars Technica (11 Sep 2026) — quotes the 9 Sep order and the 21 Aug show-cause hearing", "firstPublishedAt": "2026-09-15T06:16:05.506355+00:00", "scopeVersion": "facts-v3", "tags": [ "work", "justice", "legal-profession", "sanction", "fabricated-citations", "chatgpt", "own-use", "new-mexico" ] } ] }