South Side Area School Dist. v. Pa. HRC
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court · Pa. Commw. Ct. · Pennsylvania bar guidance
Verified May 1, 2026
- Citation
- South Side Area School Dist. v. Office of the Governor of the Commonwealth of Pa. & Pa. Human Relations Comm'n, No. 78 MD 2025 (Pa. Commw. Ct.)
- Filing date
- December 10, 2025
Summary
Two Pennsylvania school districts (South Side Area in Beaver County and Knoch in Butler) and five parents filed a March 6, 2025 petition for review in the Commonwealth Court challenging the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission's 2023 regulatory redefinition of "sex" to include "gender identity and expression." Petitioners are represented by attorneys Thomas Breth and Thomas W. King III. At the December 10-11, 2025 oral argument, Judge Matthew Wolf identified that petitioners' principal brief contained multiple fabricated citations and misquotations, including a passage attributed to Bayada Nurses, Inc. v. Commonwealth (Pa. 2010) that does not appear anywhere in the actual Supreme Court opinion. Judge Wolf asked counsel directly whether the brief contained AI hallucinations; counsel acknowledged the issue was "incredibly embarrassing" and a "very significant issue." King subsequently filed an application for relief seeking permission to file a corrected brief.
- AI tool:
- AI (unspecified generative tool)
What is the current procedural posture?
Pending as of 2026-05-01. The Commonwealth Court has not issued a public opinion on the merits or a ruling on petitioners' application to file a corrected brief; pacourts.us opinion listings through April 2026 do not show any 78 MD 2025 opinion. Reporting through January 2026 confirmed the corrected-brief application was undecided. When the court rules, the order will be the first published Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court matter directly addressing whether AI-generated fabricated citations in a brief constitute grounds for striking the brief, sanctions under Pa.R.A.P. 2741, or referral to the Disciplinary Board.
Why does South Side Area School Dist. v. Pa. HRC matter for law firms using AI?
South Side is the first published Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court matter where AI-generated fabricated citations were identified by the court at oral argument and where the response was an application for leave to file a corrected brief, paralleling the procedural posture in Pa. Commonwealth Court Memorandum Opinion No. 1172 C.D. 2025 (in which the same court denied leave to amend and struck the brief). Pennsylvania firms practicing before the Commonwealth Court should watch the ruling for whether 78 MD 2025 follows the 1172 C.D. 2025 pattern (deny leave, strike brief, decide on what remains) or carves out a corrected-brief safe harbor when counsel admits the AI issue at first opportunity. The combined effect of the two decisions will set the practical floor for Commonwealth Court Rule 2741 sanctions and Disciplinary Board referrals in AI-hallucination filings going forward.
Sources
Primary sources
Further reading
- https://clearinghouse.net/case/46260/
- https://www.spotlightpa.org/news/2026/01/pennsylvania-commonwealth-court-ai-hallucinations-allegations-justice-system/
- https://www.thomasmoresociety.org/case/south-side-area-school-district-et-al-v-office-of-the-governor-of-the-commonwealth-of-pennsylvania-and-pennsylvania-human-relations-commission
- The full transcript of Judge Wolf's December 10, 2025 oral-argument exchange has not been independently verified against a court-issued transcript; the quoted question ('Who wrote it? And does it contain AI...') and counsel's responses ('incredibly embarrassing,' 'very significant issue') are reported by Spotlight PA from courtroom observation.
- The pacourts.us UJS docket sheet for case 78 MD 2025 was unreachable from the verification IP on 2026-05-01 (the docket-specific URL requires authentication and the `www.ujsportal.pacourts.us` host has no DNS record; the portal serves only at the bare apex). The docket index can be checked via the UJS portal home page (https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/) for live status.
- King's application for relief seeking permission to file a corrected brief is referenced in Spotlight PA reporting but has not been independently obtained as a primary court PDF.