State Farm's Defense Lawyers Admit Seven Fake Case Citations in Carson Homeowner's Suit

An attorney for the insurer says an AI tool she believed was cite-checked produced citations that "simply didn't exist" across eight filings in Los Angeles Superior Court. Lead trial counsel says he did not know AI had been used — and takes responsibility anyway.

Lawyers defending State Farm in a Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit over the rebuilding of a fire-damaged home have apologized to the court for artificial-intelligence "hallucinations" in their filings, according to CalMatters, which published its account on August 18, 2026. The attorney who used the tool, Jacquelene Robinson, wrote in a filing that she confirmed seven case citations across eight filings "that simply didn't exist," along with some incorrect case titles and quotes that were not found in the cases she cited.

The plaintiff is Fa'alagilagi Meni-Siliga, a U.S. Postal Service carrier who sued in July 2024 over the handling of damage to her home in Carson, in Los Angeles County. A fire there in 2020 made the house uninhabitable, according to the lawsuit. A storm caused water damage while her contractor was working on the property. After what she described as delays getting State Farm's approval for repairs, the work was never completed, according to a January court filing described by CalMatters. She and her husband drained their savings and retirement accounts, declared bankruptcy and lost the home to foreclosure, she wrote.

"My family and I have lost forever our family home," Meni-Siliga wrote in a filing quoted by CalMatters. "We do not come from money… It took many years and sacrifice for our family to purchase our home."

Who signs the brief

The accountability question sits with the signature line, and the filings quoted by CalMatters draw it clearly. Kenneth Katel of the Los Angeles firm Musick, Peeler & Garrett apologized to the court and to the plaintiff, explaining that his co-counsel told him she had used AI to help prepare some filings.

"I was not aware that AI had been used, but as lead trial counsel I accept full responsibility for our filings," Katel wrote, in a filing quoted by CalMatters.

Katel also told the court his firm has updated its policy on AI use, but did not provide specifics, CalMatters reported. Robinson wrote that she used an AI tool called Irys, which she incorrectly believed was tied to her firm's subscription to the legal research service Westlaw and which she thought "performed an internal cite check." She was mistaken, she wrote.

The errors surfaced through opposing counsel. Eric Khodadian, representing Meni-Siliga, wrote in a filing that his side found in State Farm's motions "cases that do not exist, quotes that do not exist, and holdings that do not exist." He presented his findings at an August 7 conference in Los Angeles Superior Court and wrote afterward that a State Farm lawyer was "visibly enraged" and followed him and his co-counsel down the hall, "repeatedly demanding to see the list" of mistakes. Katel disputed that characterization, though he wrote that "it is accurate to say I was upset given the seriousness of the allegations." Both lawyers declined to answer questions from CalMatters.

What the insurer says

State Farm is reviewing what happened, spokesperson Tom Hartmann told CalMatters. "State Farm expects its external counsel to conform to the highest level of ethical standards and professionalism, including confirming the accuracy of all legal filings," he said. Hartmann did not respond to questions about how many outside law firms represent State Farm, or whether the company asks about their AI policies before hiring them, according to CalMatters.

In its original answer to the complaint, the insurer said negligence by the plaintiff, her contractor and a public adjuster caused her injuries and damages, and that she failed to bring her action within a year of the original loss. The case is set for trial in October, CalMatters reported.

The CalMatters account does not report any sanctions order or order to show cause arising from the admissions, and this desk has not independently reviewed the docket. For scale: a database of legal hallucinations worldwide, maintained by a Paris-based legal researcher, has logged 1,922 cases so far, most of them in the United States, CalMatters reported. The outlet has previously reported that a California attorney was fined $10,000 for using ChatGPT in an opening brief that contained 21 made-up quotes out of 23. In a survey cited by CalMatters, 41% of law firms and 47% of corporate legal departments said they use generative AI.