Mata v. Avianca (ChatGPT fake cites)

Mata v. Avianca — ChatGPT Fake Citations Sanctions Order (S.D.N.Y.)
S.D.N.Y. · Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)

Status
In effect
Took effect
June 22, 2023
Applies to
Attorneys practicing in U.S. federal court

Two New York attorneys submitted a brief containing six fictitious case citations generated by ChatGPT. In June 2023 Judge P. Kevin Castel sanctioned them $5,000 each — the first formal federal sanction for AI-hallucinated legal citations, and the most-cited case in subsequent bar opinions on attorney AI use.

Who is protected: Courts and opposing parties against AI-fabricated legal authorities

Legal detail

Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2023). Rule 11 sanctions of $5,000 against attorneys Steven Schwartz and Peter LoDuca for submitting brief with six fabricated ChatGPT-generated case citations. Court emphasized attorneys' duty to verify citations regardless of source.

Key facts

JurisdictionS.D.N.Y.
LevelFederal
StrengthModerate
CitationMata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)
Topicsconsumer protection · AI disclosure and transparency · automated decision-making
Court recordMata v. Avianca — CourtListener opinion

More AI rules in S.D.N.Y.

Related consumer protection rules elsewhere

See something wrong or out of date? Submit a correction. Every entry must carry a verifiable source.