Responding to the Sixth Circuit’s identification of numerous AI hallucinations by accusing them of a “vast conspiracy” led to severe sanctions for two Tennessee lawyers.

As the opinion states, it “addresses the misconduct of Glenn Whiting’s lawyers, Van Irion and Russ Egli, in their briefing before this court and the sanctions we impose for it. That briefing repeatedly misrepresented the record, cited non-existent cases, and cited cases for propositions of law that they did not even discuss, much less support.” The opinion was in response to “consolidated appeals arise out of lawsuits that Irion filed on behalf of Whiting over a 2022 fireworks show and its aftermath. Egli represents Irion and Whiting in one of the appeals. Irion represents Whiting in the other two.”

So, what was the problem? As the court opinion stated: “Whiting’s brief misrepresented the nature of the district court’s sanctions order in No. 25-5424. Also, many of the cases cited in Whiting’s briefs either did not exist, did not include the quoted language he claimed they did, or did not discuss or support the proposition for which Whiting cited them. All told, we found over two dozen fake citations and misrepresentations of fact in Whiting’s briefs, which we list in an appendix to this opinion.” That appendix is seven pages long.

Naturally, that led to a show cause order for Irion and Egli to show cause why they should not be sanctioned, instructing them to do several things, including: “explain why they should not be sanctioned for citing fake cases”, “tell us who wrote the briefs in each case”, “tell us whether the briefs were ghostwritten in whole or in part” and “tell us whether they used generative AI to write the brief” (among other requests).

Irion and Egli’s response? According to the opinion, “they said the show cause order was ‘void on its face for failing to include a signature of an Article III judge,’ was ‘motivated by harassment of the Respondent attorneys,’ and ‘reflect[ed] illegal ex-parte [sic] communications within this Court.’”

Still, the Sixth Circuit stated: “Although Irion and Egli did not seriously respond to our show cause order, we construe their responses as making four objections: (1) the show cause order violated Sixth Circuit Local Rule 46, (2) attorney-client and work-product privilege excused compliance with the show cause order, (3) the order was invalid because it allegedly came from several ex parte communications, and (4) the order is void because the clerk signed it.”  The Court then proceeded to address each of those supposed objections, discussing their rationale for rejecting them. For the fourth objection, the Court wrote in a footnote: “Irion and Egli have repeatedly questioned our practice of letting the clerk sign our orders, even suggesting that she is deciding cases without us knowing about it…Irion’s and Egli’s concerns are baseless, as a recitation of relevant facts reveals.”

So, the Court decided that “Inherent authority sanctions are appropriate in this case”, stating: “the responses to the show cause order that Irion and Egli did file show a stunning lack of respect for this court, the members of the panel and their staffs, and the rule of law. Most litigants caught submitting fake cases have apologized and sought forgiveness, rightly recognizing the seriousness of their misconduct…By contrast, Irion and Egli scolded this court and accused it of engaging in a vast conspiracy to harass them.”

Here are the sanctions that the Court issued:

1. “Irion and Egli must jointly and severally reimburse appellees in full for their reasonable attorneys’ fees on appeal in all three appeals.
2. Irion and Egli must jointly and severally pay double costs to appellees for costs incurred under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 on appeal in all three appeals.
3. Appellees must file an accounting of their costs and attorneys’ fees on appeal, with supporting documentation, no later than seven days from the date of this order. Irion and Egli shall file any responses or objections to appellees’ requests for costs and attorneys’ fees on appeal no later than seven days thereafter. There will be no replies.
4. Irion and Egli must each separately and individually pay $15,000 to the registry of this court as punitive sanctions for the proceedings in this court in all three appeals.
5. The clerk will forward a copy of this order to the chief judge to consider disciplinary proceedings under Sixth Circuit Local Rule 46.
6. If Irion and Egli are financially unable to comply with some or all of the requirements of this order, they must file an affidavit under seal describing their financial situation along with their objections to appellees’ fee requests.”

This post only scratches the surface of the 24-page order (including the seven page appendix). It’s clear that the Sixth Circuit doesn’t appreciate being accused of “engaging in a vast conspiracy” against parties. I can only imagine their response to this order.

Hat tip to Maura R. Grossman for the heads up on this case. You can also read coverage of it here from Bob Ambrogi and here from Joohn Choe.

So, what do you think? Are you surprised the Court was reportedly accused of “engaging in a vast conspiracy” against the lawyers? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.