In re: Marrett
- Party
- Pro Se Litigant
- AI Tool
- Implied / unconfirmed
Hallucinated Content
Fabricated
- Case Law
Debtors cited 'Goguen v. Nason, 419 A.2d 1032 (Me. 1980)', which Westlaw/Lexis searches showed does not exist; the court identified this citation as nonexistent and noted the apparent correct citation in the same reporter is Ridgway v. Prudential Ins. Co., 419 A.2d 1030 (Me. 1980).
Misrepresented
- Case Law
Court noted recurring issues in the Debtors' filings of 'mis-quotes and misleading characterizations' of existing authority (general misrepresentation of cited cases/authorities), though the decision does not reproduce a specific false quotation.
Outcome
No sanction or outcome recorded.
Protect Your Firm Before the Next Sanction
This case is one of 921 documented AI hallucination incidents in legal proceedings. The AI Ethics Training for Attorneys covers the specific failure modes, the Model Rules at risk, and the verification protocols that prevent them — built directly from the sanctions record.