We are  pleased to announce the publication in Law 360 of “A Simple Way Courts Can Help Attorneys Avoid AI Hallucinations” by LSW attorneys John Siffert and Rosie Rubin, with co-author Terrence M. Connors.  AI use in legal drafting has surged, and so have sanctions for fabricated citations. Courts and bar groups are warning lawyers to verify everything and, in some instances, to disclose AI use. This article is relevant to litigators across the country as use of AI is on the rise. 

The article spotlights how federal appellate “Brief QC” programs can be expanded to flag nonexistent, AI‑hallucinated case citations before briefs are formally filed.  Brief QC is an automated screening step in appellate electronic case filing systems that scans uploaded briefs for compliance with the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and local rules before formal filing, allowing lawyers to fix issues proactively. It is currently used by federal appellate courts including the Eighth Circuit since August 2022 and the Sixth Circuit since May 2025.  Their programs are modeled on an earlier Fifth Circuit initiative

Drawing on high‑profile incidents such as the sanctions imposed in Mata v. Avianca for fabricated citations, the authors argue that integrating citation‑verification into these existing QC tools would protect litigants, conserve judicial resources, and reinforce professional duties of candor and competence.

As generative AI becomes ubiquitous in legal drafting, courts and practitioners face recurring risks from unverified outputs. Recent orders and ethics commentary underscore that technology can aid advocacy only when lawyers validate authorities and accurately present law, an expectation that QC‑assisted hallucination checks can help meet without supplanting human responsibility.