About

Delaware court weighs sanctions after Richards Layton’s AI-generated brief errors

Published
Score
18

Why it matters

Richards, Layton & Finger PA faces potential sanctions in Delaware Court of Chancery after submitting a brief containing AI-generated errors—including fabricated legal citations and invented quotations—and then filing a correction that failed to fully remedy the problems. Vice Chancellor Lori W. Will has ordered the firm and director Richard P. Rollo, who signed the filings, to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed under Delaware Court of Chancery Rule 11(c), which permits joint liability against law firms absent exceptional circumstances. Firm president Paul Heath has filed an affidavit acknowledging the errors. The underlying dispute is an advancement case, Leiske v. Kidd.

The January 22, 2026 brief contained the hallucinated content, and a subsequent correction left material inaccuracies unresolved. Vice Chancellor Will issued a show-cause order on July 1. The firm has since asked the court to consider factual information about inconsistencies in its account before deciding whether to sanction the firm, Rollo, or both. The full scope of the AI-generated errors and the firm's internal review process remain under examination.

This case tests how a major Delaware corporate firm governed generative AI use, verified citations before filing, and handled remediation once errors surfaced. It represents an early, high-profile sanctions dispute over AI in legal filings and will likely shape how firms document AI policies and implement citation review procedures going forward. Attorneys should monitor the court's ruling for guidance on firm-level responsibility for AI-generated content and the procedural safeguards courts may now expect.

Sources

mail Subscribe to Law And Technology email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap