Lack of Candor is “Always a bad idea.”

Plaintiffs sued over their employer’s pandemic-era policy on masks, testing, and vaccination, claiming a valid religious exemption. The court wrote:

The claims in this case are remarkably weak, at least as pleaded. We are more candid than usual in this assessment because the plaintiffs’ counsel Anthony F. Sabatini has not been candid with us. Sabatini filed multiple briefs replete with fake and hallucinated citations. Even after being warned. “Always a bad idea.” Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., 2023 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, at 6 (2023). By outsourcing his legal work to an AI algorithm, Sabatini violated his ethical duties to both his clients and this Court.

Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc., 2026 WL 1993146 (11^th Cir. Jul. 10, 2026)(emphasis added).  This post focuses on the appellate court’s comments in misuse of A.I. The court wrote:  “It is rare to see the kind of blatant and repeated misconduct that Sabatini has committed in this case.” Id. at *5.  “Whatever the merits of artificial intelligence, it is no substitute for actual intelligence.”  Id.

The Eleventh Circuit explained:  “Though the filings in this case were substandard in a variety of ways, we have saved the worst for last. The plaintiffs’ counsel Anthony F. Sabatini’s filings are riddled with citations to nonexistent, ‘hallucinated’ cases. His opening brief relies on at least eight such cases, including one purportedly decided by this Court. After the defendants identified this problem, Sabatini acknowledged in his (untimely) proposed reply brief that those citations were ‘erroneous or unverifiable,’ and sought to withdraw his reliance on eight listed cases.  At this point, things go from bad to worse: the eight cases Sabatini ‘withdrew’ did not match a single one of the eight hallucinated cases in his opening brief. And not only were they not the right cases—all eight were also hallucinated.”  Id. at *5.

On those facts, the court wrote:

The first rule of our profession is that a lawyer “shall provide competent representation to a client”—“competent” in the sense that it requires “legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation.” Model Rules of Pro. Conduct r. 1.1 (A.B.A. 1983). It goes without saying that completely outsourcing one’s legal work to artificial intelligence software is not competent. See A.B.A. Comm. on Ethics & Pro. Resp., Formal Op. 512, at 3–4 (2024). Doing so is a dramatic violation of the client’s interests.

But it does not stop there, because lawyers are also officers of the Court. We expect that when lawyers submit briefs, they give us their best view of what the law is, and how that law supports their clients. We read those briefs carefully—not just because they are the product of counsel’s time, effort, and skill, but because they help us as we try to reach the right answer. All that is lost if a lawyer decides that it is not worthwhile to do the work to persuade us—if he is willing to sign his name on whatever a machine churns out without so much as checking it for accuracy. We cannot do our job the same way unless lawyers do theirs.

Whatever the merits of artificial intelligence, it is no substitute for actual intelligence. Any “use of AI requires caution and humility.” Roberts, 2023 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, at 5. When lawyers rely on AI tools, there is no way to get around the obligation to verify that the software got it right, and that what it got wrong will not end up in court filings. By signing his name on briefs filled with hallucinated citations—not once but twice—Sabatini violated his professional obligations, both to his clients and to this Court. If he thinks these claims are not worth the effort, he should either tell his clients they fall short or advise them to hire another lawyer—not file obviously insufficient pleadings and briefs generated by AI tools. In a separate order, this Court, through the Chief Judge, will refer the matter to the Committee on Lawyer Qualifications and Conduct. See 11th Cir. Rules, Addendum 8, r. 2(C).

Id. at *5 (emphasis added).