Smith v. Athena Construction Group, Inc.
The case
Vickie Smith, Personal Representative of the Estate of William Smith, Plaintiff-Relator v. Athena Construction Group, Inc., No. 18-cv-02080 (APM), D.D.C., Order (Document 201) filed October 3, 2025. Copy of primary document: `files/sources/D-93-smith-v-athena-construction.pdf`.
What happened
Attorney Glenn Ellis, counsel for the relator, used an AI legal research tool (identified on the public docket as Lexis Protégé / Lexis+ AI, ECF No. 196, Stage 2, full-pass) to identify authorities for an opposition brief and incorporated its output, including purported descriptions and excerpts, without double-checking. Of the nine cases cited, four were cited for a false proposition of law, four carried fabricated quotations, and one was a nonexistent case with a fabricated quotation. He and co-counsel did not withdraw the brief even after learning of some errors.
The rule and the sanction
The court found Ellis's conduct reckless and "singularly egregious" under 28 U.S.C. section 1927 because he relied exclusively on an AI research tool without checking the accuracy of the citations, propositions, or quotations it generated. Sanction: Ellis must pay the attorney's fees and costs of defendant's drafting of the motion for a continuance and the reply brief (final amount fixed at $8,151.00 by the court's October 10, 2025 sanctions order, ECF No. 203, payable to Athena Construction Group by November 14, 2025, per the public docket, Stage 2, full-pass; not in the held set). Additionally, because Ellis had already self-reported to the Pennsylvania Bar Association, the court ordered him to submit this order to supplement the record before the Pennsylvania Bar and to notify the court of the outcome of any disciplinary proceeding within seven days of receiving notice.
How it could have been avoided
Check every AI-surfaced citation, proposition, and quotation against the actual opinion before filing. Withdraw and correct a brief promptly when errors come to light, rather than leaving it on the record. When AI is used for legal research, build in a human verification pass over 100 percent of the output.