Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association
Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association 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. Texas
- Date
- January 29, 2025
- Party
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- LexisNexis AI
- Outcome
- Response stricken; monetary sanction: $3,961
- Penalty
- $3,961 in monetary penalties.
What the record shows
The court found that counsel John L. Pittman III submitted a response containing cases that do not exist, miscited cases, and cases that stood for different propositions than represented, and that he initially denied using AI before admitting he relied on a Lexis Nexis AI citation generator. The court struck the response and ordered Pittman to pay opposing counsel $3,852.50 in attorney's fees plus $108.54 in costs.
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 →