Nov. 20, 2025
Fake cases, real consequences: The Noland warning
The Noland decision delivered a sharp warning to lawyers: use generative AI at your own risk, because only human judgment -- not predictive tools -- can ensure competent, ethical legal work.
Jason E. Fellner
Partner
Fellner Law Group
Legal malpractice
University of San Francisco School of Law
On Sept.12, 2025, the California Court of Appeal published its decision in Noland v. Land of the Free, L.P., et al, 2025 WL 2629868 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025) that was, in its own words, "unremarkable." Yet, for lawyers, it was far from "unremarkable" as it was the first California Court of Appeal decision that rebuked and sanctioned the appellant's lawyer for using generative artificial intelligence in producing the appellate brief that cited cases that did not exist...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
