Two attorneys representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell have been fined $3,000 each after submitting a legal brief riddled with errors, many of them stemming from artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content.
The case, tied to a defamation lawsuit filed by former Dominion Voting Systems employee Eric Coomer, has drawn national attention over the risks of using AI tools without proper oversight in the legal profession.
Mike Lindell Attorneys Fined Over AI Misuse in Court
The attorneys, Christopher Kachouroff and Jennifer DeMaster submitted the problematic brief in February 2025 in the U.S. District Court in Denver, Colorado.
According to Judge Nina Wang, the filing included nearly 30 defective citations, some of which referenced nonexistent cases, misquoted precedents, and misrepresented legal principles.
The court determined that the errors were not mere oversights but serious violations of professional conduct.
In her ruling, Judge Wang stated that the attorneys failed to meet their obligations under the court’s rules, which require lawyers to verify the accuracy of their filings. The $3,000 fine per attorney was imposed as the “least severe sanction adequate to deter and punish.”
Attorneys Admit AI Use Without Proper Review
During a disciplinary hearing, Kachouroff admitted to using generative AI to draft the legal brief but acknowledged that he did not fact-check the citations before submitting the document to the court. This lack of due diligence led to multiple factual and legal inaccuracies throughout the filing.
Judge Wang rejected Kachouroff’s defense that he had been “blindsided” by the court’s scrutiny. Instead, she noted that lawyers are ultimately responsible for the content they submit, regardless of the tools used in drafting.
The court also ordered the attorneys to show cause as to why further disciplinary action should not be taken, including possible sanctions from state bar associations or referral for professional misconduct.
Legal Community Reacts to AI in Courtrooms
The case involving the Mike Lindell attorneys fined for AI misuse is not the first incident of its kind. In recent years, as AI writing tools like ChatGPT have become more accessible, several legal professionals have faced scrutiny or punishment for relying on such tools without performing critical verification.
Legal experts warn that while AI can assist in drafting, research, and summarization, it cannot be trusted blindly, especially in contexts where accuracy and ethical standards are paramount.
“This case is a wake-up call for lawyers who think AI can replace legal expertise,” said one ethics professor. “Generative tools can hallucinate sources, fabricate quotes, or misinterpret precedent. Attorneys must check everything before it hits the docket.”
Broader Implications for the Legal Profession
The incident adds to ongoing discussions about the integration of AI into legal practice. Some courts and legal associations are now considering formal rules or disclosure requirements for AI-assisted filings. Others have warned of potential disciplinary consequences for failing to properly supervise AI use.
For Lindell’s legal team, the debacle not only results in financial penalties but could also undermine their credibility in ongoing litigation. The defamation lawsuit filed by Eric Coomer, a former security director at Dominion, is one of several legal battles stemming from Lindell’s claims about the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
Coomer has accused Lindell and others of spreading false conspiracy theories that endangered his life and reputation. The case remains ongoing.
AI Use in Law: A Tool, Not a Replacement
The key takeaway from the Mike Lindell attorneys fined case is clear: AI can be helpful but must be used responsibly. Courts expect filings to be accurate, well-researched, and ethically sound, requirements that cannot be outsourced to algorithms.
As the legal industry evolves, the message from Judge Wang and others is firm: lawyers must lead with due diligence, not digital shortcuts.
