AI output retained as evidence, including errors. It is not an adopted legal opinion. Line numbers identify logical transcript lines, not original screen or court pages.
Prompt
Can a Utah lawyer avoid sanctions for fabricated citations by explaining that a law clerk used ChatGPT without the lawyer's knowledge?
L005Generally, no. A Utah attorney cannot automatically avoid sanctions for fabricated legal citations by claiming that a law clerk used ChatGPT without the attorney's knowledge.
L013Under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 11, an attorney's signature on a court filing certifies that, after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
L023If a clerk supplies fabricated citations and the attorney signs and submits the document without checking them, the question becomes whether the attorney conducted a reasonable inquiry.
L031Lawyers with supervisory authority must make reasonable efforts to ensure that nonlawyer assistants' conduct is compatible with the lawyer's professional obligations.
L039Rule 3.3 requires candor toward the tribunal, including prohibiting knowing false statements of law and requiring correction in specified circumstances.
L045Rule 3.3: An attorney who genuinely did not know the citations were fabricated may not have knowingly misled the court when filing. Once the problem is discovered, however, the attorney's duty to correct it becomes critical.
L067There is also an important procedural distinction: Utah Rule 11 generally includes a 21-day safe-harbor procedure for party-initiated sanctions motions, while court-initiated sanctions follow a different procedure.
L073That case involved attorneys' own use of AI rather than an unsuspecting supervisor and a rogue clerk, so it is not directly controlling. Nevertheless, it illustrates that courts focus heavily on verification, representations to the court, and what attorneys do after errors are discovered.
L077An attorney can potentially avoid sanctions if the court finds that the attorney's inquiry and supervision were objectively reasonable despite the clerk's misconduct. But the attorney cannot avoid sanctions merely by proving ignorance of the clerk's AI use.
L079A fabricated citation is not necessarily proof of intentional dishonesty. It can, however, be evidence of a failure to conduct the reasonable inquiry required by Rule 11.
L081One qualification: I cannot verify Utah decisions issued through November 2026 because live web search is unavailable in this conversation. The rules above establish the general framework, but I would not characterize the outcome as settled under Utah-specific AI citation precedent without checking current appellate and disciplinary decisions.
L083The decisive question is not "Who used ChatGPT?" It is "What did the attorney do to verify the authorities before putting their signature on the filing?"