AI Insights
AI hallucination in Mike Lindell case serves as a stark warning : NPR
MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell arrives at a gathering of supporters of Donald Trump near Trump’s residence in Palm Beach, Fla., on April 4, 2023. On July 7, 2025, Lindell’s lawyers were fined thousands of dollars for submitting a legal filing riddled with AI-generated mistakes.
Octavio Jones/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Octavio Jones/Getty Images
A federal judge ordered two attorneys representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell in a Colorado defamation case to pay $3,000 each after they used artificial intelligence to prepare a court filing filled with a host of mistakes and citations of cases that didn’t exist.
Christopher Kachouroff and Jennifer DeMaster violated court rules when they filed the document in February filled with more than two dozen mistakes — including hallucinated cases, meaning fake cases made up by AI tools, Judge Nina Y. Wang of the U.S. District Court in Denver ruled Monday.
“Notwithstanding any suggestion to the contrary, this Court derives no joy from sanctioning attorneys who appear before it,” Wang wrote in her decision. “Indeed, federal courts rely upon the assistance of attorneys as officers of the court for the efficient and fair administration of justice.”
The use of AI by lawyers in court is not, itself illegal. But Wang found the lawyers violated a federal rule that requires lawyers to certify that claims they make in court are “well grounded” in the law. Turns out, fake cases don’t meet that bar.
Kachouroff and DeMaster didn’t respond to NPR’s request for comment.
The error-riddled court filing was part of a defamation case involving Lindell, the MyPillow creator, President Trump supporter and conspiracy theorist known for spreading lies about the 2020 election. Last month, Lindell lost this case being argued in front of Wang. He was ordered to pay Eric Coomer, a former employee of Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems, more than $2 million after claiming Coomer and Dominion used election equipment to flip votes to former President Joe Biden.
The financial sanctions, and reputational damage, for the two lawyers are a stark reminder for attorneys who, like many others, are increasingly using artificial intelligence in their work, according to Maura Grossman, a professor at the University of Waterloo’s David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science and an adjunct law professor at York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School.
Grossman said the $3,000 fines “in the scheme of things was reasonably light, given these were not unsophisticated lawyers who just really wouldn’t know better. The kind of errors that were made here … were egregious.”
There have been a host of high-profile cases where the use of generative AI has gone wrong for lawyers and others filing legal cases, Grossman said. It’s become a familiar trend in courtrooms across the country: Lawyers are sanctioned for submitting motions and other court filings filled with case citations that are not real and created by generative AI.
Damien Charlotin tracks court cases from across the world where generative AI produced hallucinated content and where a court or tribunal specifically levied warnings or other punishments. There are 206 cases identified as of Thursday — and that’s only since the spring, he told NPR. There were very few cases before April, he said, but for months since there have been cases “popping up every day.”
Charlotin’s database doesn’t cover every single case where there is a hallucination. But he said, “I suspect there are many, many, many more, but just a lot of courts and parties prefer not to address it because it’s very embarrassing for everyone involved.”
What went wrong in the MyPillow filing
The $3,000 fine for each attorney, Judge Wang wrote in her order this week, is “the least severe sanction adequate to deter and punish defense counsel in this instance.”
The judge wrote that the two attorneys didn’t provide any proper explanation of how these mistakes happened, “most egregiously, citation of cases that do not exist.”
Wang also said Kachouroff and DeMaster were not forthcoming when questioned about whether the motion was generated using artificial intelligence.
Kachouroff, in response, said in court documents that it was DeMaster who “mistakenly filed” a draft version of this filing rather than the right copy that was more carefully edited and didn’t include hallucinated cases.
But Wang wasn’t persuaded that the submission of the filing was an “inadvertent error.” In fact, she called out Kachouroff for not being honest when she questioned him.
“Not until this Court asked Mr. Kachouroff directly whether the Opposition was the product of generative artificial intelligence did Mr. Kachouroff admit that he did, in fact, use generative artificial intelligence,” Wang wrote.
Grossman advised other lawyers who find themselves in the same position as Kachouroff to not attempt to cover it up, and fess up to the judge as soon as possible.
“You are likely to get a harsher penalty if you don’t come clean,” she said.
An illustration picture shows ChatGPT artificial intelligence software, which generates human-like conversation, in February 2023 in Lierde, Belgium. Experts say AI can be incredibly useful for lawyers — they just have to verify their work.
Nicolas Maeterlinck/BELGA MAG/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Nicolas Maeterlinck/BELGA MAG/AFP via Getty Images
Trust and verify
Charlotin has found three main issues when lawyers, or others, use AI to file court documents: The first are the fake cases created, or hallucinated, by AI chatbots.
The second is AI creates a fake quote from a real case.
The third is harder to spot, he said. That’s when the citation and case name are correct but the legal argument being cited is not actually supported by the case that is sourced, Charlotin said.
This case involving the MyPillow lawyers is just a microcosm of the growing dilemma of how courts and lawyers can strike the balance between welcoming life-changing technology and using it responsibly in court. The use of AI is growing faster than authorities can make guardrails around its use.
It’s even being used to present evidence in court, Grossman said, and to provide victim impact statements.
Earlier this year, a judge on a New York state appeals court was furious after a plaintiff, representing himself, tried to use a younger, more handsome AI-generated avatar to argue his case for him, CNN reported. That was swiftly shut down.
Despite the cautionary tales that make headlines, both Grossman and Charlotin view AI as an incredibly useful tool for lawyers and one they predict will be used in court more, not less.
Rules over how best to use AI differ from one jurisdiction to the next. Judges have created their own standards, requiring lawyers and those representing themselves in court to submit AI disclosures when it’s been used. In a few instances judges in North Carolina, Ohio, Illinois and Montana have established various prohibitions on the use of AI in their courtrooms, according to a database created by the law firm Ropes & Gray.
The American Bar Association, the national representative of the legal profession, issued its first ethical guidance on the use of AI last year. The organization warned that because these tools “are subject to mistakes, lawyers’ uncritical reliance on content created by a [generative artificial intelligence] tool can result in inaccurate legal advice to clients or misleading representations to courts and third parties.”
It continued, “Therefore, a lawyer’s reliance on, or submission of, a GAI tool’s output—without an appropriate degree of independent verification or review of its output—could violate the duty to provide competent representation …”
The Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, the group responsible for studying and recommending changes to the national rules of evidence for federal courts, has been slow to act and is still working on amendments for the use of AI for evidence.
In the meantime, Grossman has this suggestion for anyone who uses AI: “Trust nothing, verify everything.”
The push for artificial intelligence-related investments in Western Pennsylvania continued Thursday with a second conference that brought together business leaders and elected officials.
Not in attendance this time was President Donald Trump, who headlined a July 15 celebration of AI opportunity at Carnegie Mellon University.
This time Gov. Josh Shapiro, U.S. Sen. David McCormick and others converged in Bakery Square in Larimer to emphasize emerging public-private initiatives in anticipation of growing data center development and other artificial intelligence-related infrastructure including power plants.
Here’s what speakers and attendees at the summit were saying.
AI is not a fad
As regional leaders and business investors consider their options, BNY Mellon’s CEO Robin Vince cautioned against not taking AI seriously.
“The way to get left behind in the next 10 years is to not care about AI,” Vince said
“AI is transforming everything,” said Selin Song during Thursday’s event. As president of Google Customer Solutions, Song said that the company’s recent investment of $25 million across the Pennsylvania-Jersey-Maryland grid will help give AI training access to the more than 1 million small businesses in the state.
Google isn’t the only game in town
Shapiro noted that Amazon recently announced plans to spend at least $20 billion to establish multiple high-tech cloud computing and AI innovation campuses across the state.
“This is a generational change,” Shapiro said, calling it the largest private sector investment in Pennsylvania’s history. “This is our next chapter in innovative growth. It all fits together. This new investment is beyond data center 1.0 that we saw in Virginia.”
Fracking concerns elevated
With all of the plans for new power-hungry data centers, some are concerned that the AI push will create more environmental destruction. Outside the summit, Food & Water Watch Pennsylvania cautioned that the interest in AI development is a “Trojan horse” for more natural gas fracking. Amid President Donald Trump’s attempts to dismantle wind and solar power, alternatives to natural gas appear limited.
Nuclear ready for its moment
But one possible alternative was raised at the AI conference by Westinghouse Electric Company’s interim CEO Dan Summer.
The Pittsburgh-headquartered organization is leading a renewed interest in nuclear energy with plans to build a number of its AP 1000 reactors to help match energy needs and capabilities.
Summer said that the company is partnering with Google, allowing them to leverage Google’s AI capabilities “with our nuclear operations to construct new nuclear here.”
China vs. ‘heroes’
Underlying much of the AI activity: concerns with China’s work in this field
“With its vast resources, enormous capital, energy, workforce, the Chinese government is leveraging its resources to beat the United States in AI development,” said Nazak Nikakhtar, a national security and international trade attorney who chaired one of the panels Thursday.
Speaking to EQT’s CEO Toby Rice and Groq executive Ian Andrews, Nikakhtar outlined some of the challenges she saw in U.S. development of AI technology compared to China.
“We are attempting to leverage, now, our own resources, albeit in some respects much more limited vis-a-vis what China has, to accelerate AI leadership here in the United States and beat China,” she said. “But we’re somewhat constrained by the resources we have, by our population, by workforce, capital.”
Rice said in response that the natural resources his company is extracting will help power the country’s ability to compete with China.
Rice drew a link between the 9/11 terror attacks 24 years earlier and the “urgency” of competing with China in AI.
“People are looking to take down American economies,” Rice said. “And we have heroes. Never forget. And I do believe that us winning this race against China in AI is going to be one of the most heroic things we’re going to do.”
Eric Jankiewicz is PublicSource’s economic development reporter and can be reached at ericj@publicsource.org or on Twitter @ericjankiewicz.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
AI Insights
Commanders vs. Packers props, SportsLine Machine Learning Model AI picks, bets: Jordan Love Over 223.5 yards
The NFL Week 2 schedule gets underway with a Thursday Night Football matchup between NFC playoff teams from a year ago. The Washington Commanders battle the Green Bay Packers beginning at 8:15 p.m. ET from Lambeau Field. Second-year quarterback Jayden Daniels led the Commanders to a 21-6 opening-day win over the New York Giants, completing 19 of 30 passes for 233 yards and one touchdown. Jordan Love, meanwhile, helped propel the Packers to a dominating 27-13 win over the Detroit Lions in Week 1. He completed 16 of 22 passes for 188 yards and two touchdowns.
NFL prop bettors will likely target the two young quarterbacks with NFL prop picks, in addition to proven playmakers like Deebo Samuel, Romeo Doubs and Zach Ertz. Green Bay’s Jayden Reed has been dealing with a foot injury, but still managed to haul in a touchdown pass in the opener, while Austin Ekeler (shoulder) does not carry an injury designation for TNF. The Packers enter as a 3-point favorite with Green Bay at -172 on the money line, while the over/under is 49 points. Before betting any Commanders vs. Packers props for Thursday Night Football, you need to see the Commanders vs. Packers prop predictions powered by SportsLine’s Machine Learning Model AI.
Built using cutting-edge artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques by SportsLine’s Data Science team, AI Predictions and AI Ratings are generated for each player prop.
For Packers vs. Commanders NFL betting on Monday Night Football, the Machine Learning Model has evaluated the NFL player prop odds and provided Commanders vs. Packers prop picks. You can only see the Machine Learning Model player prop predictions for Washington vs. Green Bay here.
Top NFL player prop bets for Commanders vs. Packers
After analyzing the Commanders vs. Packers props and examining the dozens of NFL player prop markets, the SportsLine’s Machine Learning Model says Packers quarterback Love goes Over 223.5 passing yards (-112 at FanDuel). Love passed for 224 or more yards in eight games a year ago, despite an injury-filled season. In 15 regular-season games in 2024, he completed 63.1% of his passes for 3,389 yards and 25 touchdowns with 11 interceptions. Additionally, Washington allowed an average of 240.3 passing yards per game on the road last season.
In a 30-13 win over the Seattle Seahawks on Dec. 15, he completed 20 of 27 passes for 229 yards and two touchdowns. Love completed 21 of 28 passes for 274 yards and two scores in a 30-17 victory over the Miami Dolphins on Nov. 28. The model projects Love to pass for 259.5 yards, giving this prop bet a 4.5 rating out of 5. See more NFL props here, and new users can also target the FanDuel promo code, which offers new users $300 in bonus bets if their first $5 bet wins:
How to make NFL player prop bets for Washington vs. Green Bay
In addition, the SportsLine Machine Learning Model says another star sails past his total and has nine additional NFL props that are rated four stars or better. You need to see the Machine Learning Model analysis before making any Commanders vs. Packers prop bets for Thursday Night Football.
Which Commanders vs. Packers prop bets should you target for Thursday Night Football? Visit SportsLine now to see the top Commanders vs. Packers props, all from the SportsLine Machine Learning Model.
Adobe (ADBE) just reported record quarterly revenue driven by artificial intelligence gains. Will it revive confidence in the stock?
The creative software giant late Thursday posted adjusted earnings per share of $5.31 on revenue that jumped 11% year-over-year to a record $5.99 billion in the fiscal third quarter, above analysts’ estimates compiled by Visible Alpha, as AI revenues topped company targets.
CEO Shantanu Narayen said that with the third-quarter’s revenue driven by AI, Adobe has already surpassed its “AI-first” revenue goals for the year, leading the company to boost its outlook. The company said it now anticipates full-year adjusted earnings of $20.80 to $20.85 per share and revenue of $23.65 billion to $23.7 billion, up from adjusted earnings of $20.50 to $20.70 on revenue of $23.50 billion to $23.6 billion previously.
Shares of Adobe were recently rising in late trading. But they’ve had a tough year so far, with the stock down more than 20% for 2025 through Thursday’s close amid worries about the company’s AI progress and growing competition.
Wall Street is optimistic. The shares finished Thursday a bit below $351, and the mean price target as tracked by Visible Alpha, above $461, represents a more than 30% premium. Most of the analysts tracking the stock have “buy” ratings.
But even that target represents a degree of caution in the context of recent highs. The shares were above $600 in February 2024.
-
Business2 weeks agoThe Guardian view on Trump and the Fed: independence is no substitute for accountability | Editorial
-
Tools & Platforms1 month ago
Building Trust in Military AI Starts with Opening the Black Box – War on the Rocks
-
Ethics & Policy2 months agoSDAIA Supports Saudi Arabia’s Leadership in Shaping Global AI Ethics, Policy, and Research – وكالة الأنباء السعودية
-
Events & Conferences4 months agoJourney to 1000 models: Scaling Instagram’s recommendation system
-
Jobs & Careers2 months agoMumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoHappy 4th of July! 🎆 Made with Veo 3 in Gemini
-
Education2 months agoMacron says UK and France have duty to tackle illegal migration ‘with humanity, solidarity and firmness’ – UK politics live | Politics
-
Education2 months agoVEX Robotics launches AI-powered classroom robotics system
-
Funding & Business2 months agoKayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoOpenAI 🤝 @teamganassi