Struggles in the Legal World. Lawyer's Fake News Article Lands Him in Real Trouble

• Pages: 7-7
• Date: 01 July 2025
• Published date: 01 July 2025
• Author: Shirin Afsous
• Subject Matter: Administrative & Public Law

Published i n Litigation News Volu me 50, Number 4 , Summer 2025. © 2 025 by the Americ an Bar Associa tion. Reprodu ced with permiss ion. All rights r eserved. Thi s information or any p ortion

thereof may not b e copied or dis seminated in a ny form or by any mea ns or stored in a n electroni c database or r etrieval syst em without the ex press writt en consent of th e American B ar Associa tion.

federal court has concluded

that an attorney who f‌iled a

fabricated news article with

the court as a “demonstra-

tive exhibit” did so with

the intent to mislead the court. ABA

Litigation Section leaders generally

agree that the compensatory sanction

awarded against the attorney is war-

ranted and warn practitioners that the

use of fabricated evidence in court is

likely to get worse.

Al-Qarqani v. Chevron Corp. began

as an arbitration proceeding based on a

1933 agreement between Saudi Arabia

and Chevron’s predecessor, Standard

Oil Company of California. Chevron

refused to participate in the arbitra-

tion based on a “series of irregularities.”

Nevertheless, the arbitration panel issued

an $18 billion award against Chevron.

The claimants f‌iled a motion to con-

f‌irm the arbitration award in federal

district court in California. The district

court denied that motion based on

the absence of an enforceable arbitra-

tion agreement between the parties,

and the claimants appealed to the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

After oral argument, but before the

Ninth Circuit issued its opinion, claim-

ants’ counsel requested leave to attach

“for demonstrative purposes, a Saudi

Sun article that explains and provides

an informative summary of factual and

procedural events” related to the arbi-

tration proceedings.

The Ninth Circuit examined the arti-

cle and concluded that it “appears to

have been fabricated for purposes of

this litigation.” The court ordered claim-

ants’ counsel to show cause why sanc-

tions should not be imposed on him for

perpetuating a fraud on the court. The

court also appointed a special master

“to conduct any proceedings he deems

appropriate to determine the legiti-

macy of the article[.]”

The special master conducted the

hearing without counsel’s attendance

or participation. The report and recom-

Lawyer’s Fake News Article Lands

Him in Real Trouble

mendation of the special master found

that the Saudi Sun article was fabricated

as there did not appear to be any such

news publication, that the passages in

the article were almost verbatim from

counsel’s court f‌ilings, that the article

was f‌iled with the intent to mislead the

court, and that it was “plainly designed

to corrupt the legitimacy of the truth-

seeking process.”

The special master also noted that

referring to the article as a “demon-

strative exhibit” did not mean that

the attorney could avoid the rules of

evidence or the Washington Rules

of Professional Conduct, the state in

which claimants’ counsel was licensed.

Based on these f‌indings, the special

master concluded that sanctions were

appropriate and that counsel should

be required to reimburse Chevron for

its attorney fees and costs incurred in

addressing the fabricated article. The

special master also recommended a

referral to the Washington State Bar for

possible disciplinary proceedings.

In response to the special master’s

f‌indings, counsel f‌iled objections with

the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the court

lacked jurisdiction to impose sanctions,

the special master violated certain pro-

cedural and due process requirements,

the special master applied incorrect

substantive law, and the sanctions

resulted from judicial bias and miscon-

duct. The court found these arguments

meritless and adopted the special mas-

ter’s report and recommendation. The

Ninth Circuit then transferred the case

back to the district court to determine

the appropriate award of attorney fees.

Section leaders suggest that the

claimants’ counsel lost sight of his ethi-

cal duties. “For two years, he fought

this at every step,” says Thomas J.

Donlon, Stamford, CT, Co-Chair of the

Litigation Section’s Appellate Practice

Committee. “The attorney threw it in

the face of the appellate court, and

attacks the Special master, attacked the

chief judge, and it was a really amazing

pattern of conduct,” he notes.

“You have to win with integrity

and lose with grace,” advises Miranda

L. Soto, Miami, FL, Co-Chair of the

Section’s Professional Liability Litigation

Committee. “It is not normal for anyone

to fabricate evidence in any way. What

we see are demonstrative aids that are

incorrect or manipulating the evidence

in the case. This is why there are meet

and confers with counsel,” she explains.

The sanction is both compensa-

tory and punitive, “because it goes to

the defendant, but is also a sanction

in that it is designed in large part to

deter that kind of conduct,” observes

Alan Jampol, Los Angeles, CA, Co-Chair

of the Section’s Professional Liability

Litigation Committee. “I see photo-

shopped photos, graphics that are not

accurate representations of the truth,

and a constant amount of inaccurate or

clearly fabricated testimony, some of

which is detected by cross-examination,

experts, or otherwise, and some not.

I do not know how much of such fab-

ricated evidence courts realize exists,

but judges rarely indicate disbelief or

concerns about evidence during trial

or other hearings,” notes Jampol. “I

believe that fabricated articles like the

one in Al-Qarqani will be much more

pervasive as attorneys and their clients

increasingly realize the extent of the

potential use of AI,” he warns.

RESOURCES

Debra Cassens Weiss, “Lawyer is sanc-

tioned for lif ting passages from o ppo-

nent’s motio n; copying was ‘neither sl ight

nor subtle,” ABA J. (Oct. 2 0, 2022).

Hon. Carl A. Aveni, “ Engaging Your Jury

with Demonst rative Exhibits,” Litigation

News (Aug. 23, 202 3).

By Shirin Afsous, L itigation News Team Editor

SUMMER 2 025 • VOL. 50 NO. 4

7 | A BA LITIGATION SECTION

ETHICS STRU GGLES IN THE LEGAL WORL D