Recently, a colleague shared this bench slap of three lawyers in New York with me. One lawyer used fabricated citations. The others either didn’t notice or failed to report them. I edited down the much longer video to show just the bench slap, which is still quite long: about 22 minutes. There is now an order to show cause related to the fabrications. The order requires all parties to respond. The case is Landberg v. City of New York, 2025-02380.
In one matter I was involved with, long before generative AI, opposing counsel misstated the holdings in all six opinions he cited. He completely altered the meaning, so the opinions helped his client and hurt mine. While researching the issue for the supervising attorney, I read the cases and found that in reality, the cited cases helped my client. As I recall, I didn’t even bother writing a brief, the law was that clear. I simply went to my boss, explained that the cases had been misstated, revealed the true holdings and what I had found, and that was that. The case ended in our client’s favor quickly after that conversation. That particular matter was at the trial level. Imagine how much it would have cost our client if I hadn’t checked those opinions. The lesson stuck with me.
As a result of my own experience, it amazes me when attorneys don’t read the opposing side’s cases to make sure they are correctly used. It amazes me even more when appellate lawyers fail to read the cases. I just don’t understand it. I get not reading a case that stands for something obvious, like the standard for summary judgment when it is not in dispute. But the rest?
As you can see from the video, it seems some judges agree with me. In the video, the court is clearly upset with not only the lawyer who used the fabricated citations, but the other two lawyers who failed to bring them to the court’s attention.
Please don’t let this be you. Check that the citations exist, and check that the cases stand for the proposition for which they were cited. Otherwise you could end up embarrassed in front of the bar. Or worse, sanctioned, or even sued for malpractice if your failure to read the opinions harms your client’s case.