← Cases
BrazilPublic sector2023 – ongoing

Federal Court of the 1st Region (Acre), Brazil

Judge's use of ChatGPT to research case law for a ruling

Brazil’s judicial council opened an inquiry after a federal ruling cited precedents invented by ChatGPT

Scaled backPress reporting

Problem

A federal judge in Acre faced a heavy caseload and used ChatGPT to find supporting case law.

Approach

The ruling cited non-existent precedents attributed to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ). The losing party’s lawyer reported them to the regional internal affairs office. The judge described the error as a mistake caused by overwork and said a court employee had done part of the research. The National Council of Justice (CNJ) opened an inquiry in November 2023, and the regional chief inspector advised judges against using open, unapproved generative AI tools to search for precedents.

Results

No figures published

Takeaway

Fabricated precedents reached a ruling before the opposing lawyer caught them. The regional chief inspector then advised judges against using unapproved AI tools for precedent searches.

Categories

Innovation type
Process innovation
AI technology
Generative AI
Evidence
Press reporting

Sources

Source summaries

[1]Olhar Digital13 Nov 2023

Olhar Digital reported that a federal judge in Acre issued a ruling containing ChatGPT-generated passages that cited non-existent STJ precedents. The CNJ was investigating after the regional internal affairs office had stopped reviewing the matter. The judge called it a common error and said staff had been involved.

[2]Rota Jurídica13 Nov 2023

Rota Jurídica reported that the losing party’s lawyer found the fabricated STJ precedents and notified the regional internal affairs office. The CNJ opened an inquiry into the judge, who attributed the error to overwork and a court employee. Chief inspector Néviton Guedes advised judges against using open, unapproved generative AI tools for precedent research.

Full details are in the original sources.

Added 25 Oct 2026 · Updated 25 Oct 2026
Open case page ↗