Was Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com sanctioned over AI-generated citations?

Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com (S.D. Texas (Bankruptcy), November 4, 2025) is a documented matter involving citations that could not be verified against the reporters named. The recorded outcome was: Sanctions: reimburse opposing counsel's fees/costs (amount to be determined); six hours CLE; client notice; State Bar of Texas referral. No monetary penalty in this order.

Which AI tool was involved in Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com?

The order in Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com does not identify a specific generative tool by name. The court treated the citations as the product of an unverified AI-assisted drafting workflow.

November 4, 2025 · AI sanctions database

Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com

Kheir v. Titan Team, The Money Source Inc., and Auction.com 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. Texas (Bankruptcy)
Date: November 4, 2025
Party: Lawyer
AI tool: Not identified in the order
Outcome: Sanctions: reimburse opposing counsel's fees/costs (amount to be determined); six hours CLE; client notice; State Bar of Texas referral
Penalty: No monetary penalty in this order.

FineBar referralProfessional sanction

What the record shows

The court found that attorney Derrick D. King's response to the motion to dismiss contained multiple generative-AI hallucinations, including the citation 'Brasher v. Stewart' the court determined was nonexistent and pointed to an unrelated decision with quoted text the court found does not appear there, plus additional nonexistent cases and misrepresentations of authority. King admitted at the show-cause hearing that he drafted part of the response. The court ordered him to reimburse opposing counsel's reasonable fees and costs (via a later fee application), complete six hours of CLE, provide the order to his client, and referred him to the Chief District Judge and the State Bar of Texas.

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 review Back to the full tracker →

Filed under · AI sanctions database · S.D. Texas (Bankruptcy)

About this publication

Veritas is a pre-filing citation verification platform for law firms and in-house counsel. Every post on the audit log is written by the Veritas editorial team and cross-checked against the underlying sanctions order, standing order, or published opinion it references. Reporter citations are read in their named volumes. Quotations from court orders are checked against the docket.

The product was built by Andrew Zoll, founder of Veritas, who tracks generative AI sanctions in federal and state courts and turns each documented failure mode into verification logic the scanner runs. Veritas was built after the canonical Mata v. Avianca sanctions order made the verification gap a published failure mode of the bar.

AI sanctions database · Sample report · Pricing · Run a scan