Guide
How to verify case citations before you file
Courts in several jurisdictions have now sanctioned lawyers for filing briefs with citations to cases that don't exist, or that don't say what the brief claims. Most of these came from general AI tools. The fix isn't to avoid AI. It's to verify every citation, every time, the way a careful junior always should have.
For a running record of sanctioned cases, see our AI hallucination court cases tracker.
Three ways a citation fails
- It doesn't exist. Fabricated name, reporter or number.
- It exists but doesn't say that. The proposition isn't in the judgment, or appears only in a dissent, a headnote, or counsel's argument.
- It's no longer good law, or isn't binding in your court.
AI tools produce all three. The second is the hardest to catch, because the case is real.
Citation check (copy)
For each authority cited:
[ ] Located in an official or authoritative source (not only a search result)
[ ] Citation details correct (name, year, court, reporter, pin cite)
[ ] Passage read in full context, majority, not dissent or headnote
[ ] Passage actually supports the proposition as stated in the brief
[ ] Subsequent treatment checked (overruled, distinguished, doubted)
[ ] Binding or persuasive in this court, and noted as such
[ ] Quotation exact, including punctuation and omissions
Status: VERIFIED / PARTIAL (narrower than stated) / NOT SUPPORTED / NOT FOUND
How LIA Pro treats citations
LIA is built to be strict about authority:
- It cites a proposition from retrieved passages only if the passage actually supports it. A citation is demoted if the passage doesn't stand for that proposition, is only a library-search link, or isn't in the passages at all.
- A library-search URL isn't a judgment you have read.
- An unread authority isn't marked as binding, and a judgment still needs counsel's confirmation before you cite it.
- If a judgment isn't in the file, that means the judgment isn't in the bundle, not that the authority doesn't exist. LIA says which.
Use Show working to see the passages a conclusion depends on.
A worked shape (fictional)
Brief says: "Smith v Jones holds that notice by email is sufficient." Passage retrieved: the judgment discusses email notice only in the dissent. Status: NOT SUPPORTED as stated. The citation is demoted, and the majority's holding on notice is noted.
The rule
Read every case you cite. No tool, including this one, replaces counsel's confirmation.
Questions
How do I check if a case citation is real?
Locate it in an official or authoritative source, confirm the citation details, read the passage in context, and check subsequent treatment.
Why do AI tools invent case citations?
General models generate plausible text. A plausible citation isn't a verified one. Tools must check each proposition against the passage.
Does LIA Pro guarantee citations are correct?
No. It demotes citations whose passages don't support the proposition and marks what's unverified, but counsel must confirm every authority before citing it.