I normally don’t discuss many of the “AI hallucination” opinions that regularly come down these days. For one thing, they’re fairly straightforward (and uniform), and all basically say “It’s okay to use AI, but if you do, you must make sure to thoroughly check the stuff to make sure it’s right, and if you don’t,
Professor Shaun Martin
Website:
https://calapp.blogspot.com/
Professor Shaun Martin Blogs
Blog Authors
Latest from Professor Shaun Martin
U.S. v. $1,106,775 in Currency (9th Cir. – June 2, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
This is a very professorial opinion by Judge Bress. It’s got a lot of detailed introductory material regarding the discovery process in federal civil forfeiture cases, and that material is both relevant and very helpful in assessing the opinion. Very well done and well written.The en banc court concludes that the claimant’s special interrogatory…
People v. Five Guys (Cal. Supreme Ct. – June 1, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
Were there four different published opinions from the California Supreme Court today, involving five different individuals sentenced to death? Yes. Yes there were.Did I read each of those opinions in their entirety? Yes. I did.Were the underlying facts of those opinions incredibly depressing, particularly when read one after the other? Oh yes. Most definitely.Did those…
People v. Bankston (Cal. Supreme Ct. – June 1, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
The California Supreme Court may have approved it in prior cases, but (unsurprisingly) holds today that under the Racial Justice Act, using the “Bengal Tiger story” in closing argument isn’t permissible.(I always thought that “story” was silly anyway.)
J.O. v. Superior Court (Cal. Supreme Ct. – May 28, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
Finally.
I have long been a critic — like many others — of blanket 170.6 peremptory challenges. They’re bad for all the usual reasons; most critically, they permit repeat players (e.g., district attorney’s offices) to effectively transfer a judge out of a particular department (e.g., felony or murder cases) by papering that judge in every
…
ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. v. Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Comm’n (9th Cir. – May 27, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
This one took a while to resolve. I wonder how it would have turned out if it had taken longer.There’s an oil company that wants to keep secret the details about the wells it has drilled in the North Slope of Alaska. But Alaska has passed a law that says that once the wells…
U.S. v. Johnsen (9th Cir. – May 26, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
There were no published opinions yesterday, but there are some good ones today. I’m also in Iceland on a family vacation, so my posts may be a bit late this week. It’s now almost midnight here, for example, but on the upside, it’s still light outside. Sun will also rise again at 3:10 a.m. here.…
Chemical Toxin Working Group v. Best Naturals, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. – May 22, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
This is another Proposition 65 (Safe Water Drinking Water and Toxic
Enforcement Act of 1986) case. As Justice Richman’s opinion cogently recounts, it’s the third straight published opinion — all within the last several months — to hold that even though a notice that lists contact information for the attorney (rather than the principal)…
Greely v. Greely (Cal. Ct. App. – May 20, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
Here, it saves the subsequent “spouse” — who married her husband three years before he actually obtained a divorce from his former wife — from a levy of nearly $400,000 on her financial accounts.
That’s how we roll down here in San Diego. Three cheers for the efficacy of plural marriage.
Citizens Against Marketplace v. City of San Ramon (Cal. Ct. App. – May 19, 2026)
By Shaun Martin
I haven’t been able to find the petition for rehearing that resulted in this amendment by the Court of Appeal, but it was apparently at least successful at getting a bench slam (largely) removed from the opinion.Here’s the amendment:”Appellant’s petition for rehearing is DENIED. The court
remains concerned about, and does not excuse…