Fletcher v. Experian Info Solutions: Appellate Sanctions for AI-Hallucinated Briefing and Lack of Candor Under FRAP 46(c) and Inherent Authority
Summary
On February 18, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a sanctions decision in Fletcher v. Experian Info Solutions (No. 25-20086), addressing the misuse of generative AI in legal briefing. Appellate counsel Heather Hersh was found to have used AI to draft a substantial portion of her reply brief, resulting in numerous "hallucinated" quotations, misleading citations, and inaccurate factual assertions. The court determined that counsel failed to verify the brief's accuracy and was not candid in her responses to a December 18, 2025 show-cause order, initially attributing errors to "publicly available versions of the cases" before conceding AI use. Invoking Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 46(c) and its inherent authority, the Fifth Circuit ordered Hersh to pay a \$2,500 monetary sanction to the clerk of court within 30 days, emphasizing that existing rules apply to AI-driven misconduct.
Key takeaway
For legal professionals considering generative AI for drafting, you must rigorously verify all AI-generated citations, quotations, and factual assertions. Your duty of candor to the court is paramount; evasiveness regarding AI use or errors will aggravate misconduct. Failure to verify or disclose can result in significant sanctions, including monetary penalties under FRAP 46(c) and inherent authority. Courts will apply existing rules, not wait for AI-specific regulations. Ensure your firm implements strict verification workflows.
Key insights
AI-generated legal content requires strict verification and candor; existing rules sanction unverified submissions and evasiveness.
Principles
- Attorneys must verify AI-generated legal content.
- Candor with the court is paramount, especially when errors occur.
- Existing rules (FRAP 46(c), inherent authority) cover AI misuse.
In practice
- Implement mandatory citation/quotation verification checklists.
- Train legal teams on AI-safe drafting and verification.
- Link citations to official reporters or PDFs.
Topics
- AI Hallucinations
- Appellate Sanctions
- Legal Ethics
- FRAP 46(c)
- Inherent Authority
- Citation Verification
Best for: CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Director of AI/ML, Legal Professional, Consultant
Related on AIssential
See Counsel's argued verdicts on the open AI decisions leaders are weighing →
Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Welcome to the Artificial Intelligence Incident Database.