In re Boy

In re Boy 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

Illinois AC

Date

July 21, 2025

Party

Lawyer

AI tool

Not identified in the order

Outcome

Disgorgement of $6,925.62 plus $1,000 monetary penalty; ARDC referral

Penalty

$1,000 in monetary penalties.

What the record shows

The Illinois Appellate Court found that appellant's counsel, Mr. Panichi, cited eight cases in his briefs that the court and Westlaw confirmed do not exist, and that counsel admitted using a generative AI tool without verifying its output. The court ordered counsel to disgorge the $6,925.62 fee he received for the appeal and imposed an additional $1,000 penalty under Rule 375 for his conduct, and directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.

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

Primary court document ↗

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 →