Description: Two U.S. federal judges, Julien Neals (D.N.J.) and Henry Wingate (S.D. Miss.), reportedly admitted that staff in their chambers used AI tools, ChatGPT and Perplexity, to draft rulings containing purportedly fabricated quotes, cases, and parties. The erroneous filings were reportedly docketed before review, prompting Senate and judicial inquiries. Both rulings were retracted.
Editor Notes: Timeline notes: The reported timeline of events is as follows: (1) 06/30/2025, U.S. District Judge Julien Neals (District of New Jersey) issued an opinion in a securities case against CorMedix Inc. that reportedly contained fabricated case citations and quotes later traced to ChatGPT use by a law school intern; (2) 07/20/2025, U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate (Southern District of Mississippi) issued a temporary restraining order with fictitious plaintiffs and quotations, reportedly drafted with Perplexity AI by a law clerk; (3) 07/22/2025, Wingate retracted and reissued the order after being alerted to errors; (4) 10/20–10/21/2025, both judges admitted AI involvement in letters to Senator Chuck Grassley and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts; (5) 10/23/2025, Bloomberg Law reported the admissions; (6) 10/29/2025, The Washington Post published a detailed account confirming Senate inquiry and judicial reforms. The incident ID was added on 10/29/2025.
Entities
View all entitiesAlleged: OpenAI and Perplexity AI developed an AI system deployed by United States District Court for the District of New Jersey , United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi , Julien Neals , Henry Wingate , Unnamed law clerk (S.D. Miss.) and Unnamed law school intern (D.N.J.), which harmed United States District Court for the District of New Jersey , United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi , Julien Neals , Henry Wingate , Plaintiffs and defendants in CorMedix Securities Litigation , Plaintiffs and defendants in Jackson Federation of Teachers et al. v. Mississippi State Board of Education , Epistemic integrity and Judicial integrity.
Alleged implicated AI systems: ChatGPT and Perplexity
Incident Stats
Risk Subdomain
A further 23 subdomains create an accessible and understandable classification of hazards and harms associated with AI
3.1. False or misleading information
Risk Domain
The Domain Taxonomy of AI Risks classifies risks into seven AI risk domains: (1) Discrimination & toxicity, (2) Privacy & security, (3) Misinformation, (4) Malicious actors & misuse, (5) Human-computer interaction, (6) Socioeconomic & environmental harms, and (7) AI system safety, failures & limitations.
- Misinformation
Entity
Which, if any, entity is presented as the main cause of the risk
AI
Timing
The stage in the AI lifecycle at which the risk is presented as occurring
Post-deployment
Intent
Whether the risk is presented as occurring as an expected or unexpected outcome from pursuing a goal
Unintentional
Incident Reports
Reports Timeline
Loading...
Two federal judges blamed faulty rulings on the use of artificial intelligence tools by staff members, raising questions about how much they scrutinize documents issued under their names.
US district judges Julien Neals in New Jersey and He…
Loading...
Two federal judges in New Jersey and Mississippi admitted this month that their offices used artificial intelligence to draft factually inaccurate court documents that included fake quotes and fictional litigants --- drawing a rebuke from t…
Variants
A "variant" is an AI incident similar to a known case—it has the same causes, harms, and AI system. Instead of listing it separately, we group it under the first reported incident. Unlike other incidents, variants do not need to have been reported outside the AIID. Learn more from the research paper.
Seen something similar?
Similar Incidents
Did our AI mess up? Flag the unrelated incidents
Similar Incidents
Did our AI mess up? Flag the unrelated incidents