First of all, I think it's reasonable to start with the assumption that a case is fake until you validate that it is real. Secondly, that's a ridiculous place

First of all, I think it's reasonable to start with the assumption that a case is fake until you validate that it is real. Secondly, that's a ridiculous place to put the goal post. He didn't write the argument he submitted. He didn't even do basic vetting of it. It's fraudulent because he submitted work as his own that he didn't do, it's negligent because he didn't verify that the work was actually good before submitting it on behalf of his client.