Judges flag AI errors in court

New Mexico judges have found artificial intelligence-made mistakes in at least seven lawsuits since 2023, and some lawyers and self-represented parties have been sanctioned. (abqjournal.com) The Albuquerque Journal reported on April 12, 2026 that one 62-year-old Albuquerque man sought “$355.69 quintillion” in a federal employment case and was later ordered to pay $8,640 after Senior United States District Judge Judith Herrera found other filings contained artificial intelligence hallucinations. (abqjournal.com) In another New Mexico case, United States Magistrate Judge Damian Martínez wrote that a lawyer’s brief cited six nonexistent cases, fined the attorney $1,500, ordered him to report the matter to state and federal disciplinary authorities, and required a one-hour legal ethics course on artificial intelligence use. (abqjournal.com) Judges use “hallucination” to mean a system that generates made-up citations, quotations, or legal claims that look real on the page but do not exist in the record books. Martínez described the problem as fake sources produced by prediction software trained to guess the next word, not to verify a case citation. (abqjournal.com) The filings are showing up in both state and federal court, and judges say the burden falls on court staff and opposing parties to track down authorities that were never real. State District Judge John P. Sugg said self-represented litigants are “relying heavily” on artificial intelligence and often do not know how to check statutes or citations before filing. (abqjournal.com) Court records show the concern is now appearing inside written opinions, not just in off-the-record warnings. In a September 30, 2025 order in *Tomlin v. State of New Mexico*, United States District Judge James O. Browning wrote that he suspected the plaintiff used ChatGPT or a similar tool that produced nonexistent case citations. (law.justia.com) New Mexico’s judiciary has not adopted a statewide rule aimed specifically at artificial intelligence filings, but the Supreme Court’s published 2024 rule amendments show the branch is already updating court procedures in other areas as digital filing and self-representation expand. (supremecourt.nmcourts.gov) Nationally, judges have been confronting the same problem since fake citations surfaced in high-profile cases in 2023, and Bloomberg Law reported in January 2026 that artificial intelligence-faked authorities had become a recurring burden for courts. New Mexico’s cases show that the issue has moved from isolated embarrassment to routine docket management. (news.bloomberglaw.com)