Here's an analysis of the Shahid v. Esaam case decided by the Court of Appeals of Georgia on June 30, 2025. You can read the full opinion by clicking here.
This case centers on a petition to reopen a divorce case after the final judgment was entered. The Wife, Nimat Shahid, argued that the service of divorce papers by publication was improper because the Husband, Sufyan Esaam, did not exercise reasonable diligence to locate her before resorting to publication. The trial court denied her motion based on an order that cited non-existent (bogus) case law.
Key points from the appellate decision:
-
Improper Use of Fake Case Law:
The trial court's order denying the Wife's petition relied on fictitious cases. The appellate court found that the Husband's attorney, Diana Lynch, had cited multiple bogus cases in the trial court and appellate briefs. The court strongly condemned this, noting the dangers of AI "hallucinations" generating false citations. The court imposed a $2,500 frivolous motion penalty on Lynch, the maximum allowed, as a sanction. -
Due Diligence for Service by Publication:
The Wife argued that the Husband failed to show due diligence in attempting to serve her personally before using service by publication, as required by Georgia law (OCGA § 9-11-4(f)). The appellate court noted that because of the fake case citations, the trial court’s order was void on its face and could not be meaningfully reviewed. -
No Transcript Provided:
The Husband argued the superior court’s factual findings should not be reviewed because the Wife did not provide a transcript of the hearing. Generally, appellate courts defer to trial courts in factual matters if no transcript is provided. But the appellate court said that the presumption of correctness could be rebutted if there was obvious error in the record, such as reliance on bogus case law. -
Remand for New Hearing:
Due to the defective order, the appellate court vacated the trial court’s order and remanded the case for a new hearing on the Wife's motion to set aside the divorce decree. -
Attorney’s Fees Request Denied:
The Husband’s request for attorney’s fees on appeal was denied because the cited case law supporting such fees was also bogus, and Georgia law does not allow attorney fees for appellate proceedings under OCGA § 9-15-14. -
Broader Implications Regarding AI Use in Legal Filings:
The court referenced warnings from Chief Justice Roberts and other courts about the dangers of relying on generative AI tools that can produce fabricated legal authorities. Lawyers have a gatekeeping role to ensure accuracy and integrity in their filings.
Summary
This case highlights a serious ethical and procedural issue where an attorney submitted briefs citing fake cases—likely generated by AI tools—which led the court to sanction the attorney and vacate a key ruling. The appellate court emphasized that failing to properly support legal arguments with accurate authority undermines the justice system and wastes resources. The Wife’s argument about improper service by publication will now get a proper hearing free from these procedural defects.
The Girards Law Firm specializes in severe injury and wrongful death cases, especially those that involve birth injuries, brain damage, heart damage, spinal cord injuries, severe burns, commercial plane crashes and commercial trucking crashes nationwide, and especially in Texas, Arkansas and Oklahoma. James E. Girards is a private pilot licensed to fly single- and multi-engine aircraft in both visual and instrument conditions. Contact us at www.girardslaw.com by using the chat feature for more information.