Flagship tracker
Risk Digest
The flagship, near-daily updated database of documented AI hallucination and sanction incidents in legal proceedings worldwide. Each entry is a structured record, not a news article: jurisdiction, court, judge (if named), the AI tool implicated, penalty amount, ruling date, a confirmed-vs-reported status flag, and a link to the primary court order. Serves the 'check risk' and 'track regulation' tasks: a lawyer, risk manager, or journalist scanning for new sanctions, a specific jurisdiction, or a specific tool. Excludes narrative commentary, procedural how-to guidance (belongs in Workflows), and rule text summaries (belongs in Regulation). This group is the site's differentiation engine: freshness and per-record sourcing are the moat, so every record must carry a last-verified timestamp distinct from the ruling date.
Confirmed
A court order or docket entry has been independently verified.
Reported — unverified
Still pending independent verification against a primary source.
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federal (D.N.J.)CourtU.S. District Court for the District of New JerseyToolNo AI toolRuling dateJul 29, 2026Judge Quraishi Dismisses NJ Noncitizen Voter Roll Demand
Judge Quraishi dismissed the DOJ's suit over New Jersey's computerized voter list with prejudice, holding it is not a producible 'record or paper' under 52 U.S.C. § 20701 and citing voter privacy among the grounds. Not an AI-citation or attorney-sanction matter, this statutory voter-data ruling extends the DOJ's losing streak and positions the expected Caldwell appeal as the next circuit-split test after the Sixth Circuit's Benson dissent.
Last verified
COURT-CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-IDCourtIdaho District CourtToolGEDmatch, FamilyTreeDNARuling dateFeb 19, 2025How the Kohberger DNA Ruling Signals Risk for IGG Cases
Judge Hippler's February 2025 order denying suppression of investigative genetic genealogy evidence in State v. Kohberger is analyzed as a Fourth Amendment risk signal for other DNA-forensic cases, explaining why the defense's warrant arguments failed and what the abandonment and privacy-of-identity holdings mean for future prosecutions.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionMassachusettsCourtPlymouth County Superior CourtToolNoneRuling dateJul 24, 2026What’s Confirmed in the Lindsay Clancy Trial
As of July 31, 2026, with the trial in its witness phase and no verdict, this is the verified procedural record of the Lindsay Clancy case — jurisdiction, judge, counsel, charges, key rulings, and witness phase — each fact timestamped and flagged confirmed or reported.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtMultiple U.S. district courts (N.D. Ill., D. Mass., D. Md., C.D. Cal.)ToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJul 24, 2026James Percival's Judge Criticism Tests Ethics Rule 8.2
James Percival, the DHS general counsel confirmed in December 2025, used his public platform to name four federal judges as the 'Worst of the Worst,' drawing condemnation and ABA Model Rule 8.2(a) scrutiny but no formal bar proceeding. The stakes for lawyers: where legitimate criticism of a ruling ends and professional-conduct exposure begins.
Last verified
CONFIRMED - FILED, OUTCOME PENDINGUpdatedJurisdictionUnited States federalCourtU.S. District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJul 29, 2026Netflix $105M Lawsuit Details Are Filed, Outcome Pending
The verified docket in Op-Fortitude Ltd. v. Netflix, Inc. (2:26-cv-08384, C.D. Cal.) shows a $105 million complaint filed July 29, 2026, with no answer, motion, or ruling as of the July 31, 2026 last-verified check. This record supplies the court-confirmed details plus an explicit outcome-pending status flag, so readers can distinguish verified filing facts from any later resolution news.
Last verified
REPORTED/ALLEGEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaToolNoneRuling dateJul 29, 2026Who filed the Netflix $105 million lawsuit?
The named plaintiffs in the $105 million suit against Netflix over the missing 'Fortitude' master are Simon Afram and Op-Fortitude Ltd., per the July 29, 2026 docket in the Central District of California. This record keeps docket-confirmed facts separate from unadjudicated complaint allegations and covers the three claims, the damages demand, and Netflix's response.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUnited States - Central District of CaliforniaCourtU.S. District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateJul 29, 2026Why Netflix Faces a $105M Lawsuit Over a Missing Film
The $105 million figure in the Op-Fortitude v. Netflix lawsuit is a minimum damages demand in a recently filed complaint, not a verdict or fine. This record explains the underlying dispute: a stolen unencrypted master copy of an unreleased Nicolas Cage film and the custody-obligation questions at its center.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtUnited States District Court for the Eastern District of CaliforniaToolNoneRuling dateJan 1, 2025Legal Consequences for Police Officers Who Have Sex with Minors
This article maps the overlapping criminal, civil, and professional sanctions a police officer may face when engaged in a sexual relationship with a minor, including federal and state penalties, Section 1983 liability, qualified immunity trends, and decertification risks, with case examples and sentencing data from 2025–2026.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUnited StatesCourtPre-litigationToolGeneral AI audio enhancementRuling dateJul 30, 2026AI audio authentication risks in Ben Crump Tyler Smith case
The July 2026 dispute over TMZ's AI-enhanced audio of the Nolan Wells distress call, now linked through Ben Crump's consolidated representation to the Tyler Smith wrongful death case, exposes how AI-processed evidence without chain-of-custody documentation and metadata preservation creates authentication risks under FRE 901 that litigators must anticipate.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictioneuCourtEnglish Court of AppealToollegal AI toolsRuling dateJan 1, 2014How British Airways near crash case affects AI liability
Analysis of how the British Airways near crash investigation, through the Hoyle v. Rogers framework, may influence the admissibility of AI hallucination benchmark evidence in U.S. attorney sanction and malpractice proceedings, increasing vendor and law-firm exposure.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionDistrict of New JerseyCourtUnited States District Court for the District of New JerseyToolMVC softwareRuling dateJul 29, 2026DOJ Loses New Jersey Voter Roll Case, Extends 0-18 Streak
The DOJ's lawsuit seeking New Jersey's unredacted voter rolls was dismissed with prejudice on July 29, 2026, extending the department's nationwide district-court losing streak to 0-18. This record provides counsel with a benchmark for assessing the viability of similar data-demand litigation under Title III.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtUnited States District Court for the District of MaineToolNot applicableRuling dateMay 19, 2026Maine Church Lawsuit Highlights RFRA Risks for Attorneys
The Pachamama Sanctuary lawsuit against federal agencies over ayahuasca interference underscores five unresolved risk vectors—jurisdictional, tax, tort, DEA petition, and rulemaking—that attorneys must evaluate before advising religious clients on controlled substance exemptions under RFRA.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. Department of StateToolOpenAIRuling dateJul 30, 2026State Department AI blunder apology carries no legal liability
This analysis examines whether the State Department's apology for its AI-generated map that mislabeled every African country creates legal liability. The FTCA's foreign country exception and discretionary function bar preclude any tort remedy, but the incident reveals a governance gap between the Department's new GenAI playbook and the absence of basic human review.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtEastern District of TexasToolNo AI toolRuling dateSep 29, 2026Kansas nuclear reactor lawsuit challenges NRC authority
The Texas-led lawsuit challenging the NRC's oversight of small modular reactors directly affects Deep Fission's planned Kansas borehole project. This record summarizes the legal theory, procedural posture, and what the post-Loper Bright standard of review means for project developers and state regulators.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionMassachusetts, United StatesCourtMassachusetts Superior CourtToolNoneRuling dateJul 31, 2026Does sudden onset postpartum psychosis break the insanity defense?
The medical literature consistently finds postpartum psychosis has sudden onset with rapid mood fluctuations, yet legal insanity standards assume enduring mental disease. This article explains the structural mismatch and how defense counsel can argue that outward normal functioning during lucid intervals is consistent with psychosis.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionCaliforniaCourtCalifornia Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division ThreeToolChatGPTRuling dateSep 1, 2025The Underwood Teacher Probation Case That AI Keeps Hallucinating
The real Peake v. Underwood case involved a teacher probation sentence, but AI tools have hallucinated its holdings and quotations in at least three sanction proceedings. This article details the actual case, the pattern of AI errors, and the verification steps that would have prevented the sanctions.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionMassachusettsCourtMassachusetts Superior CourtToolNoneRuling dateJul 13, 2026Can Postpartum Psychosis Meet Massachusetts' McHoul Standard?
The Lindsay Clancy trial tests whether postpartum psychosis with documented treatment-seeking and command hallucinations can satisfy Massachusetts' strict McHoul standard. Pre-trial rulings on bifurcation and lay witness testimony already shape the evidentiary contest, offering risk-signal data for defense counsel handling similar cases.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionMinnesota, United StatesCourtOtter Tail County District CourtToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJul 30, 2026What Happened in the Underwood Teacher Malicious Punishment Case
This record documents the State v. Jason Rogers malicious punishment prosecution in Otter Tail County, including the incident facts, charges under Minn. Stat. § 609.377, and the July 2026 sentence imposing a stay of adjudication with multi-state teaching license surrender.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionMinnesotaCourtOtter Tail County District CourtToolNoneRuling dateJul 30, 2026Teacher loses license for stepping on students during drill
A Minnesota teacher pleaded guilty to malicious punishment for stepping on students during a lockdown drill. This case record details the charges under Minn. Stat. §609.377, the stay-of-adjudication sentence, and the court-ordered teaching license surrender across all states.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionPennsylvaniaCourtPennsylvania State Board of MedicineToolNoneRuling dateJul 30, 2026How to Report Psychiatrist Sexual Misconduct in PA: Three Tracks
Explains the three independent legal tracks—medical board complaint, criminal report, and civil lawsuit—for reporting psychiatrist sexual misconduct in Pennsylvania, including procedural requirements, deadlines, and the recent MacIntyre case showing how the board track can succeed despite a prior settlement NDA.
Last verified