Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are consequences, but they're more related to the adequacy of Google's basis for making the assertion rather than whether it is ultimately correct or incorrect. Accuracy of representations in filings in federal court is governed by Rule 11: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11 . Lawyers and their clients can be (and regularly are) sanctioned for violating the rule. The rule enumerates various requirem…
I understand you are a lawyer, but "After further discovery that could turn out to be wrong ... what matters is that there was some factual basis to begin with." does sound, to the lay person, a lot like throwing mud and seeing what sticks.
I guess it depends on how you define "throwing mud and seeing what sticks." To me, that implies a lack of investigation and recklessness as to the truth. "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! What's my basis for that allegation? I mean, it could be true, so let's depose him and find out!" That will get you sanctioned. In contrast: "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! We have a hotel maid that saw a woman enter his hotel room while he was traveling on business and leave the next morning." That's a plausible allegation that may or may not turn out to be true, depending on other facts.