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?
L008No. The Utah Court of Appeals answered this directly in Garner v. Kadince, 2025 UT App 80, and the “my clerk did it” explanation did not get the lawyer out of sanctions.
L012Richard Bednar and Douglas Durbano, representing Matthew Garner, filed a petition asking the appellate court to review a decision of the 3rd District Court. The petition cited a nonexistent 2007 case, Royer v. Nelson. Bednar said it was done by a law clerk without his knowledge and he did not fact-check the document before filing it with the court. The firm also acknowledged that the use of AI had not been previously addressed at their firm, and the law clerk responsible for the filing was a law school graduate who was terminated from the law firm.
L013utah attorneys sanctioned by appeals court for using ai to write legal brief
L019The court found that Petitioner’s counsel violated rule 40 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, which is the appellate counterpart to Rule 11. The signature on the filing is the certification. Who drafted it is irrelevant. The court said counsel fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar when they submitted a petition that contained fake precedent generated by ChatGPT. It also appreciated Bednar’s acknowledgment of his wrongdoing but sanctioned him anyway for not reviewing the document before signing.
L020The supervisory angle compounds it rather than helping: Utah RPC 5.3 makes lawyers responsible for nonlawyer assistants, so “I didn’t know my clerk was using ChatGPT” is effectively an admission of a supervision failure.
L033Candor. Bednar’s own counsel put it plainly: “you can’t point fingers and maintain credibility with the court,” so Bednar took responsibility for failing to review the cases. He apologized and offered to cover the opposing side’s fees. That likely kept the sanctions modest; a local defense attorney noted the punishment seemed reasonable, given that it didn’t appear to be malicious. Compare that with cases elsewhere where lawyers doubled down and got hit much harder.
L034Bottom line: blame-shifting to staff is a liability, not a defense. Verification of every citation is non-delegable for the signing attorney. Not legal advice; if this is a live situation, talk to Utah ethics counsel.