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.
Filtered by tag jurisdiction-us-federal — clear filter
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-TexasCourtTexas state court (Travis County)ToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateMar 7, 2024Why Talarico's 'murdered' remark likely isn't actionable
Dan Abrams urged the deputies to sue, but doctrine points the other way: the 'murdered' claim is false, yet the deputies — public officials — must prove actual malice, and Texas' anti-SLAPP statute gives Talarico an expedited-dismissal path. The realistic exposure is reputational and political, not monetary.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionSouth KoreaCourtSeoul Administrative CourtToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJan 15, 2026Four legal gates remain for Gwangju's semiconductor cluster
A statute-level legal map of the Honam semiconductor cluster after the July 6, 2026 Gwangju military airport site selection, identifying which legal gates remain un-cleared as of early August 2026 and where the government's fast-track and parallel-processing claims meet the limits of the statutory text. Counsel and diligence teams can use it to verify the designation path — including the stalled relocation track and its unresolved hosting-application conflict — before relying on the announced timeline.
Last verified
CONFIRMED; PENDINGUpdatedJurisdictionCanada; British ColumbiaCourtB.C. Supreme Court; Federal CourtToolNoneRuling dateSep 15, 2025Which Ksi Lisims LNG legal gates remain open
Verified as of Aug 4, 2026: a status record of the Ksi Lisims LNG and Prince Rupert Gas Transmission regulatory file — which federal and provincial approvals are in place, which court challenges are decided or withdrawn, and which legal gates and binding obligations remain open.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS - District of KansasCourtU.S. District Court for the District of KansasToolUnspecified generative AI toolRuling dateFeb 2, 2026Verify Kansas City Wrongful Death Lawyer's Trial Experience
Advertised trial experience is self-reported marketing until it is matched to a docket entry. This guide shows Kansas City families how to verify a wrongful-death lawyer's claims through Missouri Case.net, Kansas CaseSearch, and license records — and why the D. Kan. Lexos sanction made that check a court-enforced duty.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtNo court proceedingToolGeneral-purpose AI chatbotRuling dateJul 24, 2026How to Verify the Maple Leaf Bacon Recall List in OR/WA
How to confirm the recalled Maple Leaf bacon products and the Oregon/Washington retail consignee list against FSIS primary sources, and why an AI-generated version is unverified until checked.
Last verified
REPORTED/ALLEGEDUpdatedJurisdictionUnited States; European UnionCourtNo court proceedingToolUnspecified generative AIRuling dateAug 2, 2026Was F1 made by AI? The legal obligations behind the claim
Jodie Foster's claim that Apple's F1 was 'made by AI' isn't supported by the public production record — but the counterfactual is now legally consequential. The obligations that would attach to a genuinely AI-made film run from performer consent and disclosure rules to copyright registration and awards eligibility, with US and EU regimes separated by source and effective date.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionU.S. federal; PennsylvaniaCourtNo court (regulatory/accreditation)ToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateJun 25, 2026What Legal Obligations Valley Forge Owes Transfer Students?
For counsel and compliance officers fielding University of Valley Forge closure questions, a student's 'transfer right' is only as enforceable as the regulatory or accreditor duty behind it. This record maps the teach-out, transfer-credit disclosure, transcript access, and closed-school discharge obligations to their governing sources and deadlines.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionDelawareCourtDelaware Court of ChanceryToolNoneRuling dateJul 28, 2026What must happen before Grant Thornton-CBIZ can close?
A dated, source-verified reference to the Grant Thornton-CBIZ merger agreement: the go-shop window, closing conditions, termination fees, and appraisal rights that will determine whether the $5B deal closes, filed July 28, 2026 and verified as of August 4, 2026.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionJapanCourtHiroshima District CourtToolnoneRuling dateMay 15, 2026How Japanese drug law treats Hiroshima Carp home searches
A dated, primary-source-anchored timeline of the Hiroshima Carp etomidate case, from the December 16, 2025 positive urine test through the July 30, 2026 warrant searches of two players' homes and the team dormitory. Every investigative stage is mapped to Japanese criminal procedure — designated-drug statute, judge-issued warrant basis, pre-indictment custody, bail, and sentencing — so readers can verify who was arrested, indicted, convicted, or only searched, and what the investigation's expansion to additional players legally implies.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of New YorkToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateOct 16, 2025Why Does Diddy's Release Date Keep Changing?
Combs's reported release date has moved five times since his 2025 sentencing, and each shift traces to Bureau of Prisons administrative recalculation rules — not to a court ruling. The explainer maps the drivers behind every reported change (good conduct time, First Step Act credits, RDAP, disciplinary forfeitures) and shows why a pending appeal changes the sentence, not the BOP's projected date.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtU.S. Supreme CourtToolChatGPTRuling dateMar 21, 2025What the '1933 double' Reveals About ChatGPT Benchmarks
SCOTUSblog's 2023 and 2025 ChatGPT tests improved from 21/50 to as high as 45/50, yet the retest produced new fabricated citations — benchmark gains are not verified legal output. The 'Justice James F. West impeached in 1933' error anchors the analysis, and the real '1933 double' coin litigation (Langbord) is a separate, non-AI matter.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionJapanCourtFukuoka Prefectural AssemblyToolUnspecified AI audio toolRuling dateJul 24, 2026Which laws apply to the Fukuoka cash-for-post scandal?
The Fukuoka money scandal's legal implications split into two tracks: Japan's light-touch AI-content rules and the political-money statutes behind the cash-for-post allegations. As of August 2026 the money claims remain alleged, not adjudicated, and counsel must verify each track independently.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionIndia (Delhi)CourtRouse Avenue Courts, New DelhiToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateAug 3, 2026Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh's acquittal leaves the case open
The Aug 3, 2026 Rouse Avenue court acquittal of Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar ended the trial but not the case. This verified status record separates confirmed facts — the charges live at verdict and the pending appeal — from the reported rationale, which remains counsel-characterized until the reasoned order is released.
Last verified
NO LAWSUIT FILED (REPORTED)UpdatedJurisdictionNevada, USCourtNo court action filedToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateAug 6, 2026Legal issues behind Yerington's Monarch Data Center protest
A primary-source-linked legal record of the protest-covered Monarch Data Center project in Yerington, NV, tracking its path from the 2025 rezoning fight to the Lyon County Board of Commissioners' Aug. 6, 2026 vote on the PUD zone change, and mapping the challenges that would follow. As of Aug. 4, 2026, no lawsuit has been filed against the approvals, and each remaining vector — NRS 278 appeals, water-rights conversion, tribal-consultation arguments, and federal intervention — is flagged confirmed or reported.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionus-federalCourtNo court proceedingToolMicrosoft 365 Copilot, Azure OpenAI Service, Word Legal AgentRuling dateAug 4, 2026What Microsoft's AI spending means for legal tech buyers
Microsoft's roughly $175B AI buildout is turning its infrastructure into the default delivery channel for legal AI — but the reliability evidence for that channel is thinner than for legal-specific tools. This analysis maps the verified spending data to the procurement risks buyers must check, from Azure OpenAI data-retention terms to missing Copilot benchmarks, and distills them into a verification checklist.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-NY, US-CA, US-ME, US-WI, NL, IE, DK, AUCourtVarious state, municipal, and grid authoritiesToolMicrosoft AI data center infrastructureRuling dateJul 14, 2026Can governments stop Microsoft's AI data center buildout?
A distinct regulatory track now shapes Microsoft's AI data center buildout: moratoriums, bans, and grid conditions with different legal force, from New York's one-year permit pause to Amsterdam's 2030 bar. This jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction tracker flags each restriction's status and separates binding obligations from Microsoft's voluntary Community-First commitments.
Last verified
CONFIRMED COMPLAINT-STAGEUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of VirginiaToolChatGPTRuling dateAug 3, 2026FBI agent Patrick Yaroch charged with stealing Bitcoin
Primary-source record of the criminal complaint charging FBI agent Patrick Yaroch with interstate transportation and receipt of stolen cryptocurrency, with the ChatGPT exchanges, seizure figures, and confirmed-vs-reported status anchored to the Aug. 1, 2026 FBI affidavit and detention-order docket (E.D. Va., 1:26-mj-00300). The case is tracked as a complaint-stage proceeding, with the Aug. 4 detention hearing as the next docket event.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUSCourtNo court proceedingToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateJul 29, 2026Investor legal considerations for the CBIZ acquisition
Investors in the $5 billion Grant Thornton–CBIZ all-cash merger can verify the decisive legal considerations in the Form 8-K: the $55.00 per share cash consideration, the August 27 go-shop deadline, the condition that a majority of outstanding shares vote in favor, HSR clearance, and DGCL §262 appraisal rights. What cannot yet be verified is flagged separately — the vote date, record date, and appraisal-perfection deadline remain pending until the Schedule 14A proxy is filed.
Last verified
REPORTED/ALLEGEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federal (E.D. Va.)CourtU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of VirginiaToolChatGPTRuling dateAug 3, 2026What charges does the FBI agent face for crypto theft?
The FBI agent in the Eastern District of Virginia case faces two specific charges — interstate transportation of stolen goods and receipt of stolen goods — as set out in the complaint and affidavit unsealed on Aug. 3, 2026. This verified record lists the docket (gov.uscourts.vaed.602203), separates confirmed facts from still-reported claims, and tracks the live procedural status as of Aug. 4, 2026.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS - E.D. Va.CourtU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of VirginiaToolChatGPTRuling dateAug 3, 2026FBI agent cryptocurrency theft case, explained
A primary-source-linked briefing on the federal case against FBI agent Patrick Yaroch, charged with using internal FBI access to steal roughly $1 million in cryptocurrency from monitored adversary wallets. It separates court-confirmed facts — charges, amounts, recovery, and procedural status as of Aug 4, 2026 — from media-attributed claims such as the unnamed Russia identification.
Last verified