AI failures · Fabricated content
Park v. Kim — Second Circuit Refers Attorney to Grievance Panel for ChatGPT-Fabricated Citation
Verified Checked against its sources on 2 sources quoted
- Where it happened
- New York, United States
- Organization
- JSL Law Offices P.C. (Uniondale, New York)
- Date
- 2024-01-30 (decision)
- Function
- Legal
- Where it happened
- Legal research; motion drafting
- System
- ChatGPT
- Technology
- Generative AI
- Type of failure
- Fabricated content
- Caught by
- A court
Summary
In a medical-malpractice appeal, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that the plaintiff's lawyer had cited a state appellate decision that does not exist in her reply brief. She told the court she had asked ChatGPT to find supporting precedent and had not checked the case it suggested. The court affirmed dismissal of the underlying suit, referred the lawyer to its Grievance Panel and ordered her to give her client a copy of the decision. No monetary sanction was imposed in the ruling.
Consequence
- Attorney referred to the Second Circuit's Grievance Panel and ordered to furnish the decision to her client
Who caught it A courtFound outside the organization
Analysis
What could have been done
Checking AI output against its sources
Every factual element of AI output (citations, figures, quotations) is checked against its source before reliance.
Counsel asked a generative AI tool to find supporting precedent and cited the state appellate decision it suggested in a reply brief without checking it; the decision does not exist.
What would likely have prevented it
- Allow a citation into a filing only from the retrieved text of the authority, never from an AI tool's answer, and note in the file where each authority was read.
- Keep a full copy of every cited decision in the matter file before filing, since the court here asked for a copy and none could be produced.
What would likely have caught it earlier
- Run a pre-filing check that each cited decision can be retrieved in full from an authoritative source, so a missing case is found by the firm rather than by the court.
Key dates
- January 30, 2024Event
- October 16, 2026Checked against sources
- October 18, 2026Checked against sources
Developments are added when the record is reviewed. Next review: October 16, 2027.
Evidence
Each passage is quoted from its source. The quoted passages are re-checked against the live pages every month.
-
Park's counsel, Attorney Jae S. Lee, has admitted to citing a non-existent state court decision in her reply brief to this Court. Counsel reports that she relied on a generative artificial intelligence tool, ChatGPT, to identify precedent that might support her arguments
Supports: court (2d Cir.), attorney, one non-existent state case in a reply brief, ChatGPT as the tool
-
The conduct of Uniondale, New York lawyer Jae Lee of the JSL Law Offices fell “well below the basic obligations of counsel,” the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled Tuesday. The court referred Lee to a grievance panel, which considers possible discipline such as fines and suspensions.
Supports: consequence: referral to the court's grievance panel; no fine imposed by the ruling
Suggested citation. Eminence Scan, “Park v. Kim — Second Circuit Refers Attorney to Grievance Panel for ChatGPT-Fabricated Citation”, Eminence Growth Solutions, last verified October 16, 2026, https://eminencegrowthsolutions.com/tools/eminence-scan/record/fail-004/.
Using our research: you may read and quote Eminence Scan with credit to “Eminence Scan, Eminence Growth Solutions” and a link; all other rights reserved. Terms: Using our research.
Spotted an error, or a development we have missed? Report a correction. How we check records: research methodology.