Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California ordered defendants to file copies of two cited authorities supporting their motions to dismiss and requests for judicial notice. The court also required a declaration identifying the authorities' sources and stating whether generative AI was used in drafting the motions and requests.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether defendants should be required to provide copies of the authorities cited in support of their requests for judicial notice or incorporation by reference, with relevant passages highlighted and a declaration attesting to the authorities' sources.
Key quotations
“The Court therefore directs Defendants to provide copies of the cited authorities with the relevant passages highlighted.” (at 2)
“Finally, counsel’s declaration must state whether generative AI was used in writing the Motions and Requests.” (at 2)
Factual background
Defendants City of San Diego and individual defendants filed motions to dismiss supported by requests for judicial notice or incorporation by reference. They relied on body-worn-camera-video propositions purportedly supported by J.K.J. v. City of San Diego and Davis v. City of Apopka. The court reported that it could not locate the cited authorities and supporting passages using Westlaw and Lexis.
Procedural history
On September 3, 2025, defendants filed substantively identical motions to dismiss and requests for judicial notice or incorporation by reference. The requests relied on two cited appellate decisions concerning consideration of video evidence at the motion-to-dismiss stage. After attempting to locate the cited authorities and supporting passages, the court ordered defendants to file copies of the authorities with relevant passages highlighted and declarations identifying their sources and stating whether generative AI was used in preparing the motions and requests.