June 1, 2026 (in 3 days): New York: 22 NYCRR Part 161 takes effect, system-wide AI policy for all UCS courts

Heimkes v. Fairhope Motorcoach Resort Condominium Owners Ass'n, Inc.

U.S. District Court, Southern District of Alabama · S.D. Ala. · Alabama bar guidance

Court sanction

Verified April 26, 2026

Citation
Heimkes v. Fairhope Motorcoach Resort Condo. Owners Ass'n, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-448-TFM-N (S.D. Ala. Mar. 31, 2026) (ECF No. 353)
Decided
March 31, 2026

Summary

Attorney Franklin Hollis Eaton, Jr. filed multiple pleadings containing fabricated citations and false statements of law, including continued reliance on Chevron deference after Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo expressly overturned it. After two show cause orders, Eaton denied using AI but produced "hundreds of pages of gibberish" generated by Westlaw's Cocounsel service, which the court found riddled with erroneous information. Judge Terry F. Moorer concluded Eaton's conduct amounted to bad faith and reflected a broader pattern raising concerns about his competency to practice law.

AI tool:
Cocounsel
Sanction amount:
$55,597
This case summary is informational only. Verify the underlying opinion or order against the primary source before relying on it in any filing or client matter.

What sanction did the court impose?

Public reprimand, $55,597 in defense attorney fees, mandatory filing of the sanctions order in Eaton's pending federal and state cases, referral to the Alabama State Bar with a recommendation that Eaton be found incompetent to practice law, and referral to the Chief Judge of the Southern District of Alabama for review of his admission.

Why does Heimkes v. Fairhope Motorcoach Resort Condominium Owners Ass'n, Inc. matter for law firms using AI?

Heimkes is the first reported sanctions opinion to flag Westlaw’s Cocounsel by name, and the first to pair AI-hallucination findings with a recommendation that the attorney be declared incompetent to practice. It also illustrates a recurring pattern: the attorney denied using generative AI, then produced Cocounsel output as exculpatory evidence. For malpractice and bar-discipline purposes, the order is notable for stacking remedies, fee shifting, mandatory disclosure in pending cases, bar referral, and district court admission review, rather than imposing a single Rule 11 fine.

Sources

Primary sources

Further reading