I should note up front that both of the firms involved (the massive 1700-lawyer national one and the smaller 45-lawyer predominantly California one) have, to my knowledge, excellent reputations, and the error is not at all characteristic of their work. As to the lawyer whose outline apparently started this, the court notes that he "candidly admitted … what happened, and is unreservedly remorseful about it." Likewise, the court adds, "In their declarations and during our recent hearing, [the lawyers'] admissions of responsibility have been full, fair, and sincere. I also accept their real and profuse apologies."
But that I think just shows that all firms, however large and respected, need to be extra careful about having all their submissions thoroughly checked.
From Special Master Michael Wilner's order last week in Lacey v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co. (C.D. Cal.):
