FOLLOW US

Case Insights

1. Federal judge orders Mike Lindell's attorneys to pay $3,000 each for filing AI-generated motion containing nearly 30 defective citations and nonexistent case references
2. Lead attorney admitted to running draft motion through AI without proper verification, delegating fact-checking to co-counsel who failed to validate citations
3. Court ruling highlights critical need for legal profession to establish AI competency standards and proper prompt engineering protocols for law firms

By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald

A federal judge has delivered a stark warning to the legal profession about the perils of artificial intelligence misuse, sanctioning two attorneys representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell with $3,000 fines each for filing a court document riddled with AI-generated errors, including citations to cases that simply do not exist.

U.S. District Judge Nina Y. Wang ruled Monday that Christopher Kachouroff and Jennifer DeMaster violated court rules when they filed a motion containing nearly 30 fake or defective citations in Lindell's defamation case. The sanctions underscore a growing crisis in legal practice as attorneys increasingly turn to AI tools without adequate safeguards or understanding of their limitations.

The flawed filing emerged from a contentious defamation lawsuit brought by Eric Coomer, former director of security at Dominion Voting Systems, against Lindell and his companies. Coomer successfully argued that Lindell defamed him by spreading rumors that he engaged in election rigging, with a jury awarding him $2.3 million in damages in June 2024 – far less than the $62.7 million he sought but still a significant victory.

The case centered on Lindell's role in promoting claims that Coomer manipulated voting systems to favor Joe Biden in the 2020 election. According to Coomer, these allegations led to death threats, forcing him into hiding and ultimately costing him his career in election security.

The AI Catastrophe: How It Unfolded

The legal disaster began when Kachouroff filed what appeared to be a standard opposition motion on February 25, 2025. However, when Judge Wang questioned the numerous citation errors during a pretrial conference, a troubling pattern emerged.

Under direct questioning from the court, Kachouroff made a damaging admission: "Not initially. Initially, I did an outline for myself, and I drafted a motion, and then we ran it through AI." When Wang pressed further about verification, asking if he "double checked the citations once it was run through artificial intelligence," Kachouroff's response was devastating: "Your Honor, I personally did not check it. I am responsible for it not being checked."

Even more concerning, Kachouroff claimed the error-laden document was filed by accident – a "draft" version. Yet Judge Wang found that the supposedly "final" version he intended to file contained additional substantive errors, suggesting a complete breakdown in quality control procedures.