The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the company, finding no dispute that Noland had been an independent contractor and not an employee (as he had alleged). As a result, the Court imposed a $10,000 sanction against plaintiff’s counsel, directed him to serve a copy of the opinion on his client and ordered that a copy of the Court’s opinion be forwarded to the State Bar. The Court didn’t stop there. Noland serves as a powerful warning to practitioners across the Golden State (and beyond) that three years into the generative AI era, when an attorney cites authorities dreamed up by AI, courts will no longer tolerate protestations of ignorance about how these tools work. As for the future of AI, the potential benefits for litigants and lawyers (and everyone else in today’s society) are breathtaking, but before settling on a final answer, don’t forget the old adage: “Trust, but Verify!”