Retour à tous les articles

Offre pour développeurs

Essayez l'API ImaginePro avec 50 crédits gratuits

Créez des visuels propulsés par l'IA avec Midjourney, Flux et plus encore — les crédits gratuits se renouvellent chaque mois.

Commencer l'essai gratuit

Attorney Avoids Sanctions After AI Fakes Legal Case

2025-07-11Quinn Wilson2 minutes de lecture
Artificial Intelligence
Legal Tech
Law

In a case highlighting the growing pains of integrating artificial intelligence into the legal profession, a federal judge has decided against sanctioning an immigration attorney who used AI that generated a non-existent case citation in a court filing.

The incident involved attorney Sarnata Reynolds of Ceartas Solutions, who was representing a client, identified as Student Doe, in a lawsuit against the Trump administration. The suit alleged that the student's F-1 visa had been unlawfully terminated. In a brief filed on June 22, Reynolds cited a case titled Moms Against Poverty v. Department of State to argue that her client only needed to show a likelihood of jurisdiction to prevent the case from being dismissed.

The problem was that this case does not exist. It was a "hallucination" created by the artificial intelligence tool Reynolds had used to assist with her legal research.

A Judge's Warning in Lieu of Sanctions

On Thursday, Judge Amit P. Mehta of the D.C. District Court vacated his previous order for Reynolds to show cause for her error. He noted in his minute order that he appreciated and credited her “candid and contrite” response to the court.

However, Judge Mehta also issued a stern admonishment, stating that the use of AI is “no substitute” for an attorney's duty of due diligence. As a condition of avoiding sanctions, the judge ordered that should Reynolds commit a similar error in the future, she must inform that court about this incident.

Attorney Expresses Deep Regret

In her response brief to the court, Reynolds admitted her failure to verify the AI-generated case. She stated that she “deeply regrets” the incident and asked the judge to spare her from sanctions.

The underlying case, Doe v. Noem, was jointly dismissed on June 30, resolving the visa issue for her client. This incident, however, serves as a significant cautionary tale for legal professionals navigating the use of new AI technologies in their practice.

Lire l'article original

Comparer les plans et tarifs

Trouvez la formule adaptée à votre charge de travail et débloquez l'accès complet à ImaginePro.

Comparatif des tarifs ImaginePro
PlanTarifPoints clés
Standard$8 / mois
  • 300 crédits mensuels inclus
  • Accès aux modèles Midjourney, Flux et SDXL
  • Droits d'utilisation commerciale
Premium$20 / mois
  • 900 crédits mensuels pour les équipes en croissance
  • Plus de parallélisme et des livraisons plus rapides
  • Support prioritaire via Slack ou Telegram

Besoin de conditions personnalisées ? Parlons-en pour ajuster crédits, limites ou déploiements.

Voir tous les détails tarifaires
ImaginePro newsletter

Abonnez-vous à notre newsletter !

Abonnez-vous à notre newsletter pour recevoir les dernières nouvelles et créations.