DENVER (KDVR) — MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and his legal team are facing potential sanctions from a federal judge in Colorado after submitting a court brief that included fake cases as evidence. The brief, filed in February as part of a defamation case against Lindell, contained approximately 30 defective citations ranging from misquotes to references to cases that don’t exist. Court documents revealed that the brief was generated using artificial intelligence.
Federal Judge Nina Wang discovered the errors and has ordered Lindell, along with attorneys Christopher Kachouroff and Jennifer DeMaster, to explain why they shouldn’t face court sanctions and potential disciplinary action. While Lindell’s legal team admits to using AI in preparing the brief, they claim it was ‘properly used.’ Kachouroff attributed the submission of the flawed document to ‘human error,’ stating it was an earlier draft that was mistakenly filed.
Denver attorney David Lane, who is not involved in the case, noted that the legal community will be watching this situation closely. ‘You can use [AI], but you have to go check the citations,’ Lane said. ‘If you’re going to cite “People vs. Smith” and this is the case number, you’ve got to go look to see, “Is there such a case?”‘
Lane explained that many lawyers use AI to streamline document preparation, but the technology isn’t yet sophisticated enough to fully replace legal staff. ‘There’s a thing out there called AI hallucinations, which AI simply makes things up,’ Lane warned. ‘If any lawyer is ridiculous enough to rely only on AI to write a brief, they deserve to be held in contempt.’
The latest filing by Lindell’s team claimed they didn’t realize the mistake until Judge Wang questioned them in open court 55 days after the brief was submitted. ‘There was no lack of diligence on the part of Defense counsel and no intent to mislead this Court whatsoever,’ the filing stated.
This case highlights the growing challenges and responsibilities associated with using artificial intelligence in legal proceedings. As AI becomes more prevalent in legal practice, courts are grappling with issues of accuracy, accountability, and professional responsibility in AI-assisted document preparation.
