Real incident

Two lawyers cited six cases that never existed. ChatGPT invented all of them.

New York, 2023 - Mata v. Avianca, S.D.N.Y. - sanctions issued by Judge P. Kevin Castel

Roberto Mata sued Avianca Airlines over an injury on a flight. When the airline moved to dismiss, his lawyers filed a brief citing more than half a dozen court decisions supporting their position - complete with names, docket numbers, and internal quotations.

None of the cases existed. Avianca's lawyers could not find them; neither could the court. Pressed by Judge P. Kevin Castel, attorney Steven Schwartz admitted he had used ChatGPT for research - and had even asked the chatbot whether the cases were real. It assured him they were.

In June 2023, Judge Castel sanctioned Schwartz and his colleague Peter LoDuca, fining them $5,000 and requiring them to notify every judge falsely identified as an author of the fake opinions. The opinion called their conduct subjective bad faith - they kept defending the fake cases after the court raised doubts. The story ran on front pages worldwide and made one rule permanent in professional life: AI output is a draft. You own what you file.

What went wrong

Module 3 rebuilds this moment.

The Hallucination - learners research with an AI assistant that invents a plausible-looking source, then decide what to file. The verify-before-you-file reflex, built under realistic pressure.

Get team accessPlay the free demo
Sources