Skip to content
Regulayer™Human Control for AI
Book a live demo

Research library · Incidents

AI conduct 2025 to 2026, a one-page timeline

A dated timeline of public events from July 2025 to July 2026 on court sanctions for AI-fabricated citations, consulting reports with fabricated sources, insurers' generative AI exclusions and EU AI Act deadlines.

Compiled from public sources, 17 July 2026. Information, not legal advice.

One page, every item public and dated.

The sanctions

  • 23 July 2025. Johnson v. Dunn (N.D. Ala.): three lawyers publicly reprimanded, referred to the bar, and removed from the case over AI-fabricated citations. Their firm had an AI policy; the court found the firm acted reasonably. A policy did not protect the lawyers. (order, Courthouse News; summary, EDRM)
  • August 2025 to February 2026. An Am Law 100 firm is involved in three AI-citation incidents in roughly six months, the third after adopting an internal cite-checking policy (the February matter is an accusation, not a ruling). (Above the Law)
  • 8 June 2026. A federal judge in Mississippi sanctions four lawyers, two on each side of the same case, over AI-fabricated citations (Withers v. City of Aberdeen, N.D. Miss.). (ABA Journal)
  • Running totals. By May 2026, Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases database tracked more than 1,000 US court decisions involving AI-fabricated material (GC AI), with new decisions added at several a day (HAQQ); US courts imposed at least $145,000 in sanctions for AI-fabricated citations in Q1 2026 alone (EDRM).

The embarrassments

  • October 2025. Deloitte partially refunds the A$440,000 it was paid for an Australian government report after AI-fabricated citations are found (AP, via CTV News); a second incident follows in Canada, with fabricated citations in a health workforce report for Newfoundland and Labrador (The Independent).

The insurance market moves

  • 2024. Munich Re's "Mind the Gap" whitepaper predicts AI risk will be excluded because it is difficult to price with traditional means, and asks how a courtroom can determine what an algorithm did when even its creator is unsure. (Munich Re)
  • January 2026. ISO generative AI exclusions take effect (CG 40 47, CG 40 48, CG 35 08) (Claims Journal); WR Berkley, Chubb, Travelers, and Berkshire Hathaway constrain AI liability in parallel (CSIS). Meanwhile, in a Geneva Association survey of 600 corporate insurance decision-makers (October 2025), more than 90% said they need insurance cover tailored to AI and generative AI risks (Geneva Association).
  • May 2026. EPIC lawyers professional liability survey: 7 of 13 carriers report an increase in AI-related claims. (Insurance Business)
  • 10 July 2026. Verisk/ISO reported to be weighing new exclusions for agentic AI. (The Insurer)
  • A small affirmative market exists: in April 2025 Armilla launched AI liability insurance underwritten by Chaucer and other Lloyd's underwriters. (Armilla release)

The law arrives

  • 16 and 29 June 2026. The EU Digital Omnibus is adopted: high-risk AI duties move to December 2027 and August 2028. (iubenda, Parliament vote; Jones Walker, Council adoption and dates)
  • 2 August 2026 (Sunday). The EU AI Act reaches its general application date, and its Article 50 transparency duties take effect: people must be told when they are dealing with an AI, and AI-generated content must be marked. Not postponed. (Jones Walker)
  • 2 December 2026. The machine-readable marking grace period for pre-existing generative systems expires. (Jones Walker)