A federal judge in Mississippi has sanctioned lawyers for both sides of a contract dispute after finding that artificial intelligence helped produce faulty legal citations that were never checked before filing.
Senior U.S. District Judge Sharion Aycock of the Northern District of Mississippi imposed a mix of penalties that included barring some of the attorneys from appearing in that court for two years, disqualifying them from the case, ordering monetary fines and forwarding the order to state bar authorities.
The dispute stems from a lawsuit brought by attorney Tom Withers III against the city of Aberdeen, Mississippi, over legal fees. Withers was represented by Kathleen M. Wilson of Baton Rouge and Shauncey Hunter Ridgeway of Christian & Small LLP. The city was represented by Kathryn Y. Williams of Daniel, Williams & Associates PLLC and Mark C. McClinton of New Albany.
According to Aycock’s Monday order, all four lawyers failed to verify the legal authorities cited in their filings, a lapse the court said violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The judge described the situation as unusual because the mistakes were made by attorneys on both sides of the same case.
The court had already raised concerns in December and ordered the lawyers to explain why they should not be sanctioned after filings were found to include incorrect legal authorities. At a hearing in January, Wilson and Williams acknowledged using AI tools in preparing their work and admitted they had not independently checked the citations before filing.
Aycock said Wilson’s claim that she did not know AI could produce fabricated cases was not believable and was not an adequate defense. The court revoked her pro hac vice admission, meaning she can no longer appear in the case as an out-of-state attorney, and also barred her from appearing in any case in the district for two years. In addition, Wilson must pay a $2,500 fine and complete continuing legal education.
Williams received a similar two-year ban from appearing in the district. The judge said she had “blindly” relied on an AI research tool. Williams was also ordered to pay a $3,500 fine.
McClinton and Ridgeway were disqualified from the case and each fined $1,000 for failing to review the citations that were included in filings.
The ruling adds to a growing number of court actions addressing legal mistakes tied to generative AI. In a separate Mississippi matter, Aycock recently fined another attorney more than $20,000 and ordered AI-related continuing education after identifying similar filing problems.
The case is Withers v. City of Aberdeen, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi.
The order underscores how federal courts are increasingly treating unverified AI output as a serious compliance issue, especially when lawyers present it as part of formal legal submissions. In this case, the judge made clear that responsibility for checking citations remained with the attorneys, regardless of whether the flawed material originated from a human research assistant or an AI tool.