Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. is one matter in the Veritas record of US court proceedings involving AI-generated citations that could not be verified against the reporters named. The summary below is drawn from the underlying court document, linked at the foot of this page.
- Court
- E.D. Pa.
- Date
- April 10, 2025
- Party
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the order
- Outcome
- Counsel sanctioned; referral to bar authorities
- Penalty
- No monetary penalty in this order.
What the record shows
The court found that two citations in Attorney Palazzo's filing appeared to be AI 'hallucinations' made up of parts of actual cases, and noted he did not address the court's standing order on AI. The court granted the motions to dismiss, sanctioned counsel, and ordered the clerk to serve the memorandum on the State Bar of Pennsylvania and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Bar.
This entry reflects the court document as filed. The citations at issue could not be located in the reporters named at the time of the order. The reading here is descriptive of the public record and is not legal advice.
Source documents
The test this filing did not run
Every matter in this record shares one mechanism: a citation that did not resolve to an opinion in the reporter named, in a brief that was filed before any verification step ran. Veritas runs that step. The Filing Risk Scanner extracts each citation, resolves it against reporter and public-record sources, and returns a verdict on each one — located, partial, or not located in reporter — before the brief is signed.
Run a free reviewBack to the full tracker →

