Raul Gonzales Davila v. Roblen, LLC f/d/b/a Vicolo Pizza Restaurant and Viktor Berisha
Repeat offender (verified in the record)
The case
Raul Gonzales Davila v. Roblen, LLC f/d/b/a Vicolo Pizza Restaurant and Viktor Berisha, No. 3:23-cv-00512 (SRU) (D. Conn.), sanctions order filed February 6, 2026, 2026 WL 323134. Copy of primary document: `~/workspace/goals/ai-sanctions-case-monitoring/files/sources/D-125-gonzales-davila-v-roblen.pdf`. Source URL: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/1511/RAUL_GONZALES_DAVILA_Plaintiff_v_ROBLEN_LLC_fdba_VICOLO_PIZZA_RESTAURANT_a.pdf
What happened
David Stich filed a brief containing AI-generated quotes from legal authorities that did not contain those quotes, including fabricated language attributed to Pineda v. Frisolino, Inc.. He admitted he did not check the quotes and citations the AI tool produced. Co-counsel Stephanie Stich separately contacted chambers about filing a "corrected version" without disclosing that the filed version contained hallucinated AI quotes; she was not sanctioned.
The rule and the sanction
The court found David Stich negligently failed to perform his responsibility as an officer of the court. Sanctions imposed on David Stich: at least three hours of continuing legal education on the responsible use of AI in legal practice, and a requirement to share his new knowledge with the Connecticut legal community in written form (for example a blog post, op-ed, or letter to the editor). The court declined to impose sanctions on Stephanie Stich.
How it could have been avoided
(a) Do not quote case language you have not personally confirmed appears in the decision; fabricated quotes are the most damaging form of AI hallucination. (b) The same unverified workflow produced a parallel defective brief in Cojom v. Roblen (D-108): the two briefs were filed the same day in June 2025 and are parallel Episode 1s of one confirmed-repeat unit, so a basic verification rule would have prevented both. (c) When seeking to correct a filing, disclose the real reason to the court immediately; concealment risks separate candor sanctions.