{"id":128165,"date":"2025-07-24T12:58:55","date_gmt":"2025-07-24T20:58:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/07\/24\/federal-judge-pulls-opinion-with-fake-quotes-and-you-know-what-that-means\/"},"modified":"2025-07-24T12:58:55","modified_gmt":"2025-07-24T20:58:55","slug":"federal-judge-pulls-opinion-with-fake-quotes-and-you-know-what-that-means","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/07\/24\/federal-judge-pulls-opinion-with-fake-quotes-and-you-know-what-that-means\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Judge Pulls Opinion With Fake Quotes And YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS!"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Ready to cross another milestone on the legal profession\u2019s march into slop? Too bad! Because we\u2019re already here. We\u2019ve had lawyers citing fake cases excreted from generative AI<\/a> without ever learning their lesson<\/a> for a while now, but these errors get quickly caught by opposing counsel. The problem jumped the firebreak when a Georgia judge signed off on an order based on fake cases<\/a> that didn\u2019t get fixed until it reached a very grumpy appellate court. Now, for the first time, we have a federal judge clawing back his own opinion over fake citations.<\/p>\n

The words \u201cAI\u201d aren\u2019t being used, but\u2026 you know.<\/p>\n

Bloomberg Law\u2019s Justin Henry reported yesterday<\/a> that Judge Julien Xavier Neals of the District of New Jersey \u2014 fresh off replacing Alina Habba and triggering a nascent constitutional crisis<\/a> \u2014 withdrew his June 30 order in the CorMedix securities lawsuit after lawyers pointed out a few case cites that were just plain wrong:<\/p>\n

\n

Willkie Farr & Gallagher partner Andrew Lichtman, who represents CorMedix, wrote Neals on Tuesday, telling the judge he may want to \u201cconsider whether amendment or any other action should be taken\u201d in regard to errors he made in his June 30 decision. Lawyers in a\u00a0separate case<\/a>\u00a0earlier this month also pointed out flaws in Neals\u2019 CorMedix opinion, saying it \u201ccontains pervasive and material inaccuracies.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It doesn\u2019t seem as though there are any fake cases or even necessarily wrong conclusions of law. But there are mistakes and misquotes. The judge quoted Dang v. Amarin Corp.<\/em> calling executives\u2019 behavior \u201cclassic evidence of scienter.\u201d And while that case does delve into scienter, the precise quote isn\u2019t there. Same with a quote about an Intelligroup case, citing \u201cfalse statements in their own right\u201d despite that line not being present either. Stichting Pensioenfonds Metaal en Techniek v. Verizon<\/em> is cited as a Southern District of New York case even though it\u2019s from New Jersey.<\/p>\n

Ah, Jersey people\u2026 always trying to pretend they\u2019re from New York. <\/p>\n

\n

Lichtman\u2019s letter also noted that the opinion attributes two quotes to CorMedix the company is not alleged to have made. He noted in his letter to Neals, however, that he was not requesting reconsideration of the opinion.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But, like, he was requesting reconsideration of the opinion.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, the mistakes have already broken contain. Outlook Therapeutics shareholders litigating a different, related case already cited the now-withdrawn order as persuasive precedent. The hallucinations are burrowing their way into the record. Common law gets messy when mistakes are allowed to compound across the system. We can\u2019t have district court judges just making up fake stuff\u2026 that\u2019s expressly reserved for the Supreme Court<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Judge Withdraws Pharma Opinion After Lawyer Flags Made-Up Quotes<\/a> [Bloomberg Law News]<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: For The Love Of All That Is Holy, Stop Blaming ChatGPT For This Bad Brief<\/a>
Trial Court Decides Case Based On AI-Hallucinated Caselaw<\/a>
Mike Lindell Lawyers Earn Pillow-Soft Sanction After Letting AI Do The Thinking<\/a><\/p>\n

The post Federal Judge Pulls Opinion With Fake Quotes And YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS!<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Ready to cross another milestone on the legal profession\u2019s march into slop? Too bad! Because we\u2019re already here. We\u2019ve had lawyers citing fake cases excreted from generative AI<\/a> without ever learning their lesson<\/a> for a while now, but these errors get quickly caught by opposing counsel. The problem jumped the firebreak when a Georgia judge signed off on an order based on fake cases<\/a> that didn\u2019t get fixed until it reached a very grumpy appellate court. Now, for the first time, we have a federal judge clawing back his own opinion over fake citations.<\/p>\n

The words \u201cAI\u201d aren\u2019t being used, but\u2026 you know.<\/p>\n

Bloomberg Law\u2019s Justin Henry reported yesterday<\/a> that Judge Julien Xavier Neals of the District of New Jersey \u2014 fresh off replacing Alina Habba and triggering a nascent constitutional crisis<\/a> \u2014 withdrew his June 30 order in the CorMedix securities lawsuit after lawyers pointed out a few case cites that were just plain wrong:<\/p>\n

\n

Willkie Farr & Gallagher partner Andrew Lichtman, who represents CorMedix, wrote Neals on Tuesday, telling the judge he may want to \u201cconsider whether amendment or any other action should be taken\u201d in regard to errors he made in his June 30 decision. Lawyers in a\u00a0separate case<\/a>\u00a0earlier this month also pointed out flaws in Neals\u2019 CorMedix opinion, saying it \u201ccontains pervasive and material inaccuracies.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It doesn\u2019t seem as though there are any fake cases or even necessarily wrong conclusions of law. But there are mistakes and misquotes. The judge quoted Dang v. Amarin Corp.<\/em> calling executives\u2019 behavior \u201cclassic evidence of scienter.\u201d And while that case does delve into scienter, the precise quote isn\u2019t there. Same with a quote about an Intelligroup case, citing \u201cfalse statements in their own right\u201d despite that line not being present either. Stichting Pensioenfonds Metaal en Techniek v. Verizon<\/em> is cited as a Southern District of New York case even though it\u2019s from New Jersey.<\/p>\n

Ah, Jersey people\u2026 always trying to pretend they\u2019re from New York. <\/p>\n

\n

Lichtman\u2019s letter also noted that the opinion attributes two quotes to CorMedix the company is not alleged to have made. He noted in his letter to Neals, however, that he was not requesting reconsideration of the opinion.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But, like, he was requesting reconsideration of the opinion.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, the mistakes have already broken contain. Outlook Therapeutics shareholders litigating a different, related case already cited the now-withdrawn order as persuasive precedent. The hallucinations are burrowing their way into the record. Common law gets messy when mistakes are allowed to compound across the system. We can\u2019t have district court judges just making up fake stuff\u2026 that\u2019s expressly reserved for the Supreme Court<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Judge Withdraws Pharma Opinion After Lawyer Flags Made-Up Quotes<\/a> [Bloomberg Law News]<\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: For The Love Of All That Is Holy, Stop Blaming ChatGPT For This Bad Brief<\/a>
Trial Court Decides Case Based On AI-Hallucinated Caselaw<\/a>
Mike Lindell Lawyers Earn Pillow-Soft Sanction After Letting AI Do The Thinking<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ready to cross another milestone on the legal profession\u2019s march into slop? Too bad! Because we\u2019re already here. We\u2019ve had lawyers citing fake cases excreted from generative AI without ever learning their lesson for a while now, but these errors get quickly caught by opposing counsel. The problem jumped the firebreak when a Georgia judge […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":128129,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128165","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/GettyImages-1004669742-dx1Peq.jpg?fit=591%2C591&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128165","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128165"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128165\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/128129"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128165"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128165"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128165"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}