Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty v. Thomas Fogarty et al.
Sai Malena Jimenez-Fogarty v. Thomas Fogarty 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
- S.D. New York
- Date
- April 29, 2026
- Party
- Lawyer
- AI tool
- Not identified in the order
- Outcome
- Monetary penalty: $2,500 (Rule 11); client and court notifications
- Penalty
- $2,500 in monetary penalties.
What the record shows
The court found that attorney Tricia S. Lindsay signed two briefs each containing a number of citations that do not exist or are not located in the cited reporter, and that she made no reasonable attempt to check them. The court sanctioned Lindsay $2,500 under Rule 11, payable to the Clerk, and ordered her to provide the opinion to her client and to notify the judges in her other pending cases.
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 →