Nebraska Attorney Faces Suspension After Alleged AI-Generated Brief
The intersection of legal ethics and generative AI has reached the Nebraska Supreme Court, where an Omaha attorney is now facing a recommended temporary suspension from practicing law. The case highlights a growing trend of “hallucinations” in legal filings—where artificial intelligence creates fictitious cases and citations—and the severe professional consequences that follow.
The Case of Greg Lake
Omaha attorney Greg Lake is at the center of a disciplinary recommendation by the Nebraska Council for Discipline. The issue stems from a divorce appeal Lake argued before the Nebraska Supreme Court in February 2026. During the proceedings, it was revealed that Lake’s legal brief was riddled with inaccuracies.
The opposing counsel informed the court that out of 63 references in Lake’s brief, 57 contained defects. These errors included:
- Misquotes from existing statutes and cases.
- Twenty specific “hallucinations,” including fictitious details added to real Nebraska court cases.
- References to four completely fabricated cases.
When questioned by the justices about these errors, Lake denied using artificial intelligence. He claimed that his computer broke although he was traveling for his 10th wedding anniversary and that he accidentally uploaded an incorrect draft. He described his writing process as one where he occasionally includes elements that “wouldn’t pass muster” during the drafting phase. The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed the divorce appeal last month, stating that Lake’s explanation lacked credibility.
Impact on the Client
The legal fallout has extended beyond the attorney to his client, Jason Regan. Due to the complications of the case, Regan has faced mounting legal costs, including a $17,000 bill from opposing counsel and an additional $35,000 owed for his ex-wife’s legal fees.
A Growing Trend of AI “Hallucinations” in Law
The Nebraska case is part of a broader global surge in court sanctions against lawyers who use AI-generated content without proper verification. According to researcher Damien Charlotin, there have been more than 1,200 such instances to date, with approximately 800 occurring in U.S. Courts.
Other notable examples of this trend include:
- MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell: Attorneys were fined $3,000 each for filing briefs with fictitious, AI-generated citations.
- Oregon Federal Court: A lawyer was ordered to pay $109,700 in sanctions and costs for filing AI-generated errors.
Key Takeaways for Legal Professionals
- Verification is Mandatory: Generative AI can provide benefits if used with “caution and humility,” but it is prone to inventing facts and citations.
- Credibility Risks: Courts are increasingly skeptical of explanations regarding “wrong drafts” when the errors align with known AI patterns.
- Financial Liability: Errors in filings can lead to significant sanctions for the attorney and unexpected costs for the client.
What’s Next?
Greg Lake has one week to file a response to the Nebraska Council for Discipline’s recommendation before the Nebraska Supreme Court issues a final ruling on his law license. As AI continues to permeate the legal system, this case serves as a stark reminder that the responsibility for the accuracy of a court filing rests solely with the signing attorney.
Keep reading