Dillon v. Myles Stephenson, et al.
Dillon v. Myles Stephenson, et al. 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
- W.D. Oklahoma
- Date
- March 11, 2026
- Party
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the order
- Outcome
- Admonishment
- Penalty
- No monetary penalty in this order.
What the record shows
The court identified incorrect citations in plaintiffs' response brief: it found two cited cases (Lane v. Buchanan and Conley v. Board of Regents) do not exist, and that a case with the same name as Hall v. GEO Group exists but the reporter citations were incorrect and the case did not support the proposition. Although counsel represented AI was not used to generate content, the court strongly admonished counsel that impermissible AI use in future submissions would result in sanctions.
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 →