Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals sanctioned respondents’ counsel for submitting a brief containing fabricated case citations, a fabricated quotation, and a fabricated statement of law, apparently generated with artificial intelligence. The court imposed a $2,000 monetary sanction payable to the Appellate Court Services Division of the Oregon Judicial Department and struck the respondents’ brief. The court permitted respondents to file a replacement brief subject to specified certification requirements concerning authorship and verification of cited authorities.

Holdings

1. An attorney's submission of an appellate brief supported in whole or in part by nonexistent law warrants monetary sanctions because the filing violates the certification required by ORCP 17 C(3), as applied to appellate courts through ORAP 1.40(4).
2. A sanction of $500 for each fabricated citation and $1,000 for each fabricated quotation or substantive statement of law was reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in a total sanction of $2,000 against respondents' counsel.
3. After striking an answering brief containing fabricated authority, the court may allow respondents to file a replacement brief rather than proceed without an answering brief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an attorney who submits an appellate brief containing fabricated legal authorities and false legal statements should be sanctioned.
2. What monetary sanction is reasonable for fabricated citations, quotations, and statements of law in an appellate brief.
3. Whether respondents should be allowed to file a replacement answering brief after the original brief was stricken, and what conditions may be imposed on that filing.

Disposition

other