Chakma v. Sushi Katsuei, Inc.
Chakma v. Sushi Katsuei, Inc. 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
- S.D. New York
- Date
- May 19, 2026
- Party
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- LexisNexis AI
- Outcome
- Monetary penalty: $1,000; plus $1,710 fee reimbursement attributable to counsel
- Penalty
- $2,710 in monetary penalties.
What the record shows
Defense counsel admitted using LexisNexis's AI tool to construct submissions, failing to review the final versions, and acknowledged that certain citations resulted from AI hallucinations and did not support the propositions cited. The court ordered Defense Counsel to pay $1,710 of a $48,690 fee award attributable to her misconduct and imposed a separate $1,000 deterrence penalty payable to the Clerk, for $2,710 in liability tied to the AI conduct; the remaining fee and cost amounts were assigned to the defendants.
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 →