[ { "citation": "925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019)", "asserted_case_name": "Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co., Ltd.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Varghese” decision bears the docket number 18-13694, which is associated with the case George Cornea v. U.S. Attorney General, et al. The Federal Reporter citation for “Varghese” is associated with J.D. v Azar, 925 F.3d 1291 (D.C. Cir. 2019).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co., Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "2013 IL App (1st) 111279-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2013)", "asserted_case_name": "Shaboon v. Egyptair", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions contain similar deficiencies. Respondents have now acknowledged that the “Varghese”, “Miller”, “Petersen”, “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions were generated by ChatGPT and do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Shaboon v. Egyptair, 2013 IL App (1st) 111279-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "905 F. Supp. 2d 121 (D.D.C. 2012)", "asserted_case_name": "Peterson v. Iran Air", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Petersen” decision does not exist. Docket number 10-cv-542 (D.D.C.) is associated with the case Cummins-Allison Corp. v. Kappos, which was before Judge Ellen S. Huvelle. The Federal Supplement citation is to United States v. ISS Marine Services, 905 F. Supp. 2d 121 (D.D.C. 2012), a decision by Judge Beryl A. Howell.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Peterson v. Iran Air, 905 F. Supp. 2d 121 (D.D.C. 2012).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, Et Al., Petitioners, v. ISS MARINE SERVICES, INC., Respondent", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, Et Al., Petitioners, v. ISS MARINE SERVICES, INC., Respondent", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, Et Al., Petitioners, v. ISS MARINE SERVICES, INC., Respondent, not Peterson v. Iran Air" }, { "citation": "2019 WL 4639462 (Tex. App. Sept. 25, 2019)", "asserted_case_name": "Martinez v. Delta Airlines, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions contain similar deficiencies. Respondents have now acknowledged that the “Varghese”, “Miller”, “Petersen”, “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions were generated by ChatGPT and do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Martinez v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 2019 WL 4639462 (Tex. App. Sept. 25, 2019).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2017 WL 2418825", "asserted_case_name": "Estate of Durden v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions contain similar deficiencies. Respondents have now acknowledged that the “Varghese”, “Miller”, “Petersen”, “Shaboon”, “Martinez” and “Durden” decisions were generated by ChatGPT and do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Estate of Durden v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 2017 WL 2418825.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "174 F.3d 366, 371-72 (2d Cir. 1999)", "asserted_case_name": "Miller v. United Airlines, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The “Miller” decision does not exist. Second Circuit docket number 98-7926 is associated with the case Vitale v. First Fidelity, which was assigned to a panel consisting of Judges Richard Cardamone, Amalya Kearse and Chester Straub. The Federal Reporter citation for “Miller” is to Greenleaf v. Garlock, Inc., 174 F.3d 352 (3d Cir. 1999).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Miller v. United Airlines, Inc., 174 F.3d 366, 371-72 (2d Cir. 1999).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Charles GREENLEAF, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. GARLOCK, INC.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Owens Corning, Appellant, No. 97-1820; Charles Greenleaf, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. Garlock, Inc.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Garlock, Inc., Appellant, No. 97-1821", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Charles GREENLEAF, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. GARLOCK, INC.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Owens Corning, Appellant, No. 97-1820; Charles Greenleaf, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. Garlock, Inc.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Garlock, Inc., Appellant, No. 97-1821", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Charles GREENLEAF, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. GARLOCK, INC.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Owens Corning, Appellant, No. 97-1820; Charles Greenleaf, Jr., Alternate Executor of the Estate of Charles Greenleaf, Sr., Deceased; Naomi Greenleaf, in Her Own Right v. Garlock, Inc.; Fibreboard Corporation; Celotex Corporation; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton; Sepco Corp.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Owens-Illinois Glass Co., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Anchor Packing Co., Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Green Tweed & Co., Inc.; Melrath Gasket Company, Inc.; Melrath Basket Holding Co., Inc.; Pars Manufacturing Co., Third-Party Defendants. Garlock, Inc., Appellant, No. 97-1821, not Miller v. United Airlines, Inc." }, { "citation": "732 F.3d 104, 108 (2d Cir. 2013)", "asserted_case_name": "Muhammad v. Walmart Stores East, L.P.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "“Under Rule 11, a court may sanction an attorney for, among other things, misrepresenting facts or making frivolous legal arguments.” Muhammad v. Walmart Stores East, L.P., 732 F.3d 104, 108 (2d Cir. 2013) (per curiam).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Muhammad v. Walmart Stores East, L.P., 732 F.3d 104, 108 (2d Cir. 2013).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_unverified_name", "category": "not_checked", "verificationLabel": "Could not be checked — not enough surrounding context to verify", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "citation resolves but the brief's case name could not be checked against it" }, { "citation": "496 U.S. 384, 398 (1990)", "asserted_case_name": "Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax Corp.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "The filing of papers “without taking the necessary care in their preparation” is an “abuse of the judicial system” that is subject to Rule 11 sanction. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 398 (1990).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 398 (1990).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: COOTER & GELL v. HARTMARX CORP. Et Al.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "COOTER & GELL v. HARTMARX CORP. Et Al.", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to COOTER & GELL v. HARTMARX CORP. Et Al., not Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax Corp." }, { "citation": "634 F.3d 647, 654 (2d Cir. 2011)", "asserted_case_name": "Fishoff v. Coty Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc", "court": "S.D. New York", "date": "2023-06-22", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368/gov.uscourts.nysd.575368.54.0_8.pdf" }, "quote": "“The fact that a legal theory is a long-shot does not necessarily mean it is sanctionable.” Fishoff v. Coty Inc., 634 F.3d 647, 654 (2d Cir. 2011).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Fishoff v. Coty Inc., 634 F.3d 647, 654 (2d Cir. 2011).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "248 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)", "asserted_case_name": "Ex parte Vasquez", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Ex Parte Lee", "court": "Texas CA", "date": "2023-07-19", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/250/Ex_parte_Lee_Texas_CA_July_19_2023.pdf" }, "quote": "Ex parte Vasquez, 248 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) cites to the tenth page of In re Rodriguez, 248 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.), a mandamus case arising in the context of a divorce proceeding... The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has not published an opinion with that caption since 1986.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ex parte Vasquez, 248 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: In Re Sanjuana RODRIGUEZ and the Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Relators", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In Re Sanjuana RODRIGUEZ and the Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Relators", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to In Re Sanjuana RODRIGUEZ and the Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Relators, not Ex parte Vasquez" }, { "citation": "592 S.W.2d 494 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979)", "asserted_case_name": "Ex parte Clayton", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Ex Parte Lee", "court": "Texas CA", "date": "2023-07-19", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/250/Ex_parte_Lee_Texas_CA_July_19_2023.pdf" }, "quote": "Ex parte Clayton, 592 S.W.2d 494 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) cites to the seventh page of M.H. Siegfried Real Estate, Inc. v. Renfrow, 592 S.W.2d 488 (Mo. App. 1979), an appeal from a Missouri trial court's denial of an injunction and damages related to a real property dispute... The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals did not publish an opinion in 1979 captioned Ex parte Clayton.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ex parte Clayton, 592 S.W.2d 494 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: M. H. SIEGFRIED REAL ESTATE, INC. v. James P. RENFROW, Defendants-Respondents", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "M. H. SIEGFRIED REAL ESTATE, INC. v. James P. RENFROW, Defendants-Respondents", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to M. H. SIEGFRIED REAL ESTATE, INC. v. James P. RENFROW, Defendants-Respondents, not Ex parte Clayton" }, { "citation": "340 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011)", "asserted_case_name": "Ex parte Martinez", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Ex Parte Lee", "court": "Texas CA", "date": "2023-07-19", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/250/Ex_parte_Lee_Texas_CA_July_19_2023.pdf" }, "quote": "Ex parte Martinez, 340 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) cites to the fifth page of Cochran v. Cochran, 340 S.W.3d 638 (Mo. App. 2011), an appeal from a Missouri circuit court's judgment dissolving a marriage.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ex parte Martinez, 340 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: In Re the MARRIAGE OF Amanda Dawn COCHRAN and Stephen Wayne Cochran. Amanda Dawn Cochran, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stephen Wayne Cochran, Respondent-Respondent", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In Re the MARRIAGE OF Amanda Dawn COCHRAN and Stephen Wayne Cochran. Amanda Dawn Cochran, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stephen Wayne Cochran, Respondent-Respondent", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to In Re the MARRIAGE OF Amanda Dawn COCHRAN and Stephen Wayne Cochran. Amanda Dawn Cochran, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stephen Wayne Cochran, Respondent-Respondent, not Ex parte Martinez" }, { "citation": "622 S.W.3d 99, 104 (Tex. App.—Waco 2020, no pet.)", "asserted_case_name": "Neville v. State", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Ex Parte Lee", "court": "Texas CA", "date": "2023-07-19", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/250/Ex_parte_Lee_Texas_CA_July_19_2023.pdf" }, "quote": "an appellant's brief must contain a clear and concise argument of the contentions made with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(i); Neville v. State, 622 S.W.3d 99, 104 (Tex. App.—Waco 2020, no pet.).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Neville v. State, 622 S.W.3d 99, 104 (Tex. App.—Waco 2020, no pet.).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "20 cases share this name at a different citation, but this reporter is outside the set Cite11 has confirmed court-family coverage for -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "968 F.2d 946, 950 (7th Cir. 1992)", "asserted_case_name": "Ratzlaf v. Nordstrom, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Frier v. Hingiss", "court": "E.D. Wisconsin", "date": "2023-09-15", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2121/Frier_v_Hingiss_et_al_USA_13_September_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "this cite, 968 F.2d 946, is the third page of a Ninth Circuit opinion titled United States v. Derr, 968 F.2d 943 (9th Cir. 1992)... neither Westlaw nor Google indicate that the Seventh Circuit has ever heard a case by the name of Ratzlaf v. Nordstrom. Counsel nevertheless quotes from this supposed decision. (The court's finding combines a wrong-case address with a fabricated quote from the fictitious decision.)", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ratzlaf v. Nordstrom, Inc., 968 F.2d 946, 950 (7th Cir. 1992).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. K.T. DERR, Chairman of Chevron Corporation, Defendant-Appellant", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. K.T. DERR, Chairman of Chevron Corporation, Defendant-Appellant", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. K.T. DERR, Chairman of Chevron Corporation, Defendant-Appellant, not Ratzlaf v. Nordstrom, Inc." }, { "citation": "662 F.3d 428 (7th Cir. 2011)", "asserted_case_name": "Palka v. City of Chicago", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Frier v. Hingiss", "court": "E.D. Wisconsin", "date": "2023-09-15", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2121/Frier_v_Hingiss_et_al_USA_13_September_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "He purports to quote from Palka v. City of Chicago, 662 F.3d 428 (7th Cir. 2011), but the language he cites appears nowhere in the decision.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Palka v. City of Chicago, 662 F.3d 428 (7th Cir. 2011).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "410 F.3d 404, 423 (7th Cir. 2005)", "asserted_case_name": "King v. Ill. State Bd. of Elections", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Frier v. Hingiss", "court": "E.D. Wisconsin", "date": "2023-09-15", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2121/Frier_v_Hingiss_et_al_USA_13_September_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Courts are wary of imposing attorney’s fees where those fees might discourage civil rights plaintiffs “from bringing potentially meritorious claims, out of fear that they [will] have to pay a defendant’s legal fees if they [can]not establish their claim.” King v. Ill. State Bd. of Elections, 410 F.3d 404, 423 (7th Cir. 2005).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "King v. Ill. State Bd. of Elections, 410 F.3d 404, 423 (7th Cir. 2005).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "880 F.2d 928, 938 (7th Cir. 1989)", "asserted_case_name": "Mars Steel Corp. v. Cont’l Bank N.A.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Frier v. Hingiss", "court": "E.D. Wisconsin", "date": "2023-09-15", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2121/Frier_v_Hingiss_et_al_USA_13_September_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "anything that motivates attorneys to consistently evaluate the strength of the cases they bring is, at bottom, a plus. See Mars Steel Corp. v. Cont’l Bank N.A., 880 F.2d 928, 938 (7th Cir. 1989) (quoting In re Cent. Ice Cream Co., 836 F.2d 1068, 1073 (7th Cir. 1987)).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mars Steel Corp. v. Cont’l Bank N.A., 880 F.2d 928, 938 (7th Cir. 1989).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: MARS STEEL CORPORATION v. CONTINENTAL BANK N.A., Appeal of William J. TUNNEY, Edward T. Joyce, Peter B. Carey, and Steven J. Rotunno, Objectors-Appellants", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "MARS STEEL CORPORATION v. CONTINENTAL BANK N.A., Appeal of William J. TUNNEY, Edward T. Joyce, Peter B. Carey, and Steven J. Rotunno, Objectors-Appellants", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to MARS STEEL CORPORATION v. CONTINENTAL BANK N.A., Appeal of William J. TUNNEY, Edward T. Joyce, Peter B. Carey, and Steven J. Rotunno, Objectors-Appellants, not Mars Steel Corp. v. Cont’l Bank N.A." }, { "citation": "202 P.3d 1186, 1202 (Colo. 2009)", "asserted_case_name": "In re Fisher", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Zachariah Crabill Disciplinary Case", "court": "Colorado SC", "date": "2023-11-21", "url": "https://www.law360.com/pulse/articles/1770085/attachments/1" }, "quote": "Under Colorado case law and Colo. RPC 3.3(a)(1), failure to disclose material information to a tribunal is the equivalent of making a false statement of material fact. See In re Fisher, 202 P.3d 1186, 1202 (Colo. 2009).", "note": "OCR-extracted from a scanned stipulation; punctuation lightly normalized. The specific fabricated ChatGPT citations from Respondent's own motion were not itemized in this document’s readable text — see extraction notes.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "In re Fisher, 202 P.3d 1186, 1202 (Colo. 2009).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In the Matter of Robert Scott FISHER", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In the Matter of Robert Scott FISHER) contains In re Fisher's party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "95 AD3d 1338, 1339-1340 [2d Dept 2012]", "asserted_case_name": "Matter of Rottkamp", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Matter of Samuel", "court": "CC New York", "date": "2024-01-11", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/233/Matter_of_Samuel_NY_Court_January_11_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "“[a]n objectant seeking to establish that a will is the product of fraud must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the proponent of the will knowingly made false statements to the testator...” (Matter of Rottkamp, 95 AD3d 1338, 1339-1340 [2d Dept 2012].)", "note": "the order finds “five of the six cases cited in his reply are either erroneous or nonexistent” but does not itemize their citation strings in this published opinion text — see extraction notes.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Matter of Rottkamp, 95 AD3d 1338, 1339-1340 [2d Dept 2012].", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In the Matter of Jacob H. Rottkamp, Carmen Rottkamp, Respondent Janis Rottkamp", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In the Matter of Jacob H. Rottkamp, Carmen Rottkamp, Respondent Janis Rottkamp) contains Matter of Rottkamp's party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "114 A.D.3d 947 (3d Dep’t 2014)", "asserted_case_name": "Matter of Bourguignon v. Coordinated Behavioral Health Servs., Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Park v. Kim", "court": "2nd Cir.", "date": "2024-01-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/243/Park_v._Kim_US_2nd_Cir._CA_January_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The reply brief cited only two court decisions. We were unable to locate the one cited as “Matter of Bourguignon v. Coordinated Behavioral Health Servs., Inc., 114 A.D.3d 947 (3d Dep’t 2014).”", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Matter of Bourguignon v. Coordinated Behavioral Health Servs., Inc., 114 A.D.3d 947 (3d Dep’t 2014).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: In the Matter of Teresa Ann Kay v. Salvatore P. Desantis, Jr.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In the Matter of Teresa Ann Kay v. Salvatore P. Desantis, Jr.", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to In the Matter of Teresa Ann Kay v. Salvatore P. Desantis, Jr., not Bourguignon v. Coordinated Behavioral Health Servs., Inc." }, { "citation": "564 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2009)", "asserted_case_name": "Wolters Kluwer Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Scivantage", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Park v. Kim", "court": "2nd Cir.", "date": "2024-01-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/243/Park_v._Kim_US_2nd_Cir._CA_January_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "“We review a district court’s imposition of sanctions for abuse of discretion.” Wolters Kluwer Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Scivantage, 564 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2009).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Wolters Kluwer Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Scivantage, 564 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2009).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_unverified_name", "category": "not_checked", "verificationLabel": "Could not be checked — not enough surrounding context to verify", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "citation resolves but the brief's case name could not be checked against it" }, { "citation": "496 U.S. 384, 395 (1990)", "asserted_case_name": "Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "In re Thomas Grant Neusom", "court": "M.D. Florida", "date": "2024-03-08", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/332/Re_Thomas_Grant_Neusom_Florida_USA_May_8_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "“It is well established that a federal court may consider collateral issues after an action is no longer pending.” See Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 395 (1990) (a voluntary dismissal does not expunge Rule 11 sanctions).", "note": "date corrected in this session to 2024-03-08 per the order's own signature line — the tracker/filename said May 8, 2025. This order adopts an underlying Grievance Committee report not included in the fetched document; the specific fabricated citations from Mr. Neusom's own filing are not itemized in this text — see extraction notes.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 395 (1990).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "971 F.3d 1299, 1316 (11th Cir. 2020)", "asserted_case_name": "Law Sols. of Chicago LLC v. Corbett", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "In re Thomas Grant Neusom", "court": "M.D. Florida", "date": "2024-03-08", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/332/Re_Thomas_Grant_Neusom_Florida_USA_May_8_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "See also Law Sols. of Chicago LLC v. Corbett, 971 F.3d 1299, 1316 (11th Cir. 2020) (rejecting argument that Bankruptcy Court could not impose sanctions after case was closed and never reopened) (collecting cases).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Law Sols. of Chicago LLC v. Corbett, 971 F.3d 1299, 1316 (11th Cir. 2020).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "64 F.4th 223 (2d Cir. 2022)", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Figueroa-Florez", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Michael Cohen Matter", "court": "S.D.N.Y.", "date": "2024-03-20", "url": "https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/18cr602%20Cohen%20Opinion.pdf" }, "quote": "citing United States v. Figueroa-Florez, 64 F.4th 223 (2d Cir. 2022); United States v. Ortiz (No. 21-3391), 2022 WL 4424741 (2d Cir. Oct. 11, 2022); and United States v. Amato, 2022 WL 1669877 (2d Cir. May 10, 2022). There was only one problem: The cases do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Figueroa-Florez, 64 F.4th 223 (2d Cir. 2022).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "(No. 21-3391), 2022 WL 4424741 (2d Cir. Oct. 11, 2022)", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Ortiz", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Michael Cohen Matter", "court": "S.D.N.Y.", "date": "2024-03-20", "url": "https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/18cr602%20Cohen%20Opinion.pdf" }, "quote": "citing United States v. Figueroa-Florez, 64 F.4th 223 (2d Cir. 2022); United States v. Ortiz (No. 21-3391), 2022 WL 4424741 (2d Cir. Oct. 11, 2022); and United States v. Amato, 2022 WL 1669877 (2d Cir. May 10, 2022). There was only one problem: The cases do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Ortiz, (No. 21-3391), 2022 WL 4424741 (2d Cir. Oct. 11, 2022).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2022 WL 1669877 (2d Cir. May 10, 2022)", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Amato", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Michael Cohen Matter", "court": "S.D.N.Y.", "date": "2024-03-20", "url": "https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/18cr602%20Cohen%20Opinion.pdf" }, "quote": "citing United States v. Figueroa-Florez, 64 F.4th 223 (2d Cir. 2022); United States v. Ortiz (No. 21-3391), 2022 WL 4424741 (2d Cir. Oct. 11, 2022); and United States v. Amato, 2022 WL 1669877 (2d Cir. May 10, 2022). There was only one problem: The cases do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Amato, 2022 WL 1669877 (2d Cir. May 10, 2022).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "104 F.3d 32, 35 (2d Cir. 1997)", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Lussier", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Michael Cohen Matter", "court": "S.D.N.Y.", "date": "2024-03-20", "url": "https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/18cr602%20Cohen%20Opinion.pdf" }, "quote": "‘[of sentencing] incorporated by reference in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)’ — the statute governing termination of supervised release — ‘including deterrence, rehabilitation, or proportionality.’ Id. (citing United States v. Lussier, 104 F.3d 32, 35 (2d Cir. 1997)).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Lussier, 104 F.3d 32, 35 (2d Cir. 1997).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "731 F.3d 1222, 1231 (11th Cir. 2013)", "asserted_case_name": "Smith v. City of Oakland", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "court": "9th Cir.", "date": "2024-03-22", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/236/Grant_v._City_of_Long_Beach_9th_C._CA_March_22_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "they also cite two cases that do not appear to exist. See Smith v. City of Oakland, 731 F.3d 1222, 1231 (11th Cir. 2013); Jones v. Williams, 791 F.2d 1024 (9th Cir. 1986).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Smith v. City of Oakland, 731 F.3d 1222, 1231 (11th Cir. 2013).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Talton WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Talton WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Talton WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant, not Smith v. City of Oakland" }, { "citation": "791 F.2d 1024 (9th Cir. 1986)", "asserted_case_name": "Jones v. Williams", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "court": "9th Cir.", "date": "2024-03-22", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/236/Grant_v._City_of_Long_Beach_9th_C._CA_March_22_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "they also cite two cases that do not appear to exist. See Smith v. City of Oakland, 731 F.3d 1222, 1231 (11th Cir. 2013); Jones v. Williams, 791 F.2d 1024 (9th Cir. 1986).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Jones v. Williams, 791 F.2d 1024 (9th Cir. 1986).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David CARPENTER, Kenneth P. Felis, and R. Foster Winans, Defendants-Appellants", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David CARPENTER, Kenneth P. Felis, and R. Foster Winans, Defendants-Appellants", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David CARPENTER, Kenneth P. Felis, and R. Foster Winans, Defendants-Appellants, not Jones v. Williams" }, { "citation": "669 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2012)", "asserted_case_name": "Hydrick v. Hunter", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "court": "9th Cir.", "date": "2024-03-22", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/236/Grant_v._City_of_Long_Beach_9th_C._CA_March_22_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "the brief states that Hydrick v. Hunter, 669 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2012), “examined a claim of false imprisonment brought by a parent whose child was unlawfully removed from the home by government officials.” Hydrick, however, discusses no such claim... The words “parent” and “child” appear nowhere in the opinion. (A real, existing citation with a fabricated holding/characterization attributed to it, rather than a literal fabricated quotation — closest fit to FAKE_QUOTE among the given labels.)", "note": "Real, correctly-resolving citation; the brief mischaracterized its holding, not a fabricated quotation. Outside Cite11’s checked scope (existence/resolution/quote-matching, not propositional support).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hydrick v. Hunter, 669 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2012).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "364 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 2004)", "asserted_case_name": "Wall v. County of Orange", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "court": "9th Cir.", "date": "2024-03-22", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/236/Grant_v._City_of_Long_Beach_9th_C._CA_March_22_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Appellants’ brief states that Wall v. County of Orange, 364 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 2004), “addressed intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against police officers who unlawfully removed a child from her parent.” Wall instead concerns allegations of excessive force, false arrest, and false imprisonment brought by a dentist... The words “parent” and “child” are, once again, absent from the opinion. (A real, existing citation with a fabricated holding/characterization — closest fit to FAKE_QUOTE.)", "note": "Real, correctly-resolving citation; the brief mischaracterized its holding, not a fabricated quotation. Outside Cite11’s checked scope (existence/resolution/quote-matching, not propositional support).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Wall v. County of Orange, 364 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 2004).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "508 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir. 2007)", "asserted_case_name": "Sekiya v. Gates", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "court": "9th Cir.", "date": "2024-03-22", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/236/Grant_v._City_of_Long_Beach_9th_C._CA_March_22_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "“Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 and our corresponding Circuit Rules 28–1 to –4 clearly outline the mandatory components of a brief on appeal. These rules exist for good reason.” Sekiya v. Gates, 508 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Sekiya v. Gates, 508 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir. 2007).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "(1926) 71 Cal.App. 346", "asserted_case_name": "Kerrigan v. O’Meara", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Rasmussen v. Rasmussen", "court": "California", "date": "2024-08-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/439/Rasmussen_v._Rasmussen_CA_USA_August_23_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Defendant cites for this proposition to Kerrigan v. O’Meara (1926) 71 Cal.App. 346. No such case exists.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Kerrigan v. O’Meara, (1926) 71 Cal.App. 346.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. R. H. W. ALBREXSTONDARE, Appellant", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. R. H. W. ALBREXSTONDARE, Appellant", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. R. H. W. ALBREXSTONDARE, Appellant, not Kerrigan v. O’Meara" }, { "citation": "(1962) 200 Cal.App.2d 163, 170", "asserted_case_name": "Dino v. Pelliccioni", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Rasmussen v. Rasmussen", "court": "California", "date": "2024-08-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/439/Rasmussen_v._Rasmussen_CA_USA_August_23_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Defendant cites to Dino v. Pelliccioni (1962) 200 Cal.App.2d 163, 170. That citation, however, is for Kramer v. State Board of Accountancy (1962) 200 Cal.App.2d 163.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Dino v. Pelliccioni, (1962) 200 Cal.App.2d 163, 170.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: FLOYD J. KRAMER Et Al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY, Defendant and Respondent", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "FLOYD J. KRAMER Et Al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY, Defendant and Respondent", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to FLOYD J. KRAMER Et Al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY, Defendant and Respondent, not Dino v. Pelliccioni" }, { "citation": "(2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 589", "asserted_case_name": "Cummings v. Dessel", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Rasmussen v. Rasmussen", "court": "California", "date": "2024-08-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/439/Rasmussen_v._Rasmussen_CA_USA_August_23_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Cummings v. Dessel (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 589 suggests the exact opposite: “in many modern transactions, sale of the property is preferable to physical division since the value of the divided parcels frequently will not equal the value of the whole parcel before division.” (Id. at p. 597.)", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Cummings v. Dessel, (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 589.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "466 U.S. 668", "asserted_case_name": "Strickland v. Washington", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "USA v. Michel", "court": "D.D.C.", "date": "2024-08-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/475/USA_v._Michel_DDC_USA_30_August_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695 (stating, in assessing prejudice, \"the question is whether there is a reasonable probability that, absent the errors, the factfinder would have had a reasonable doubt respecting guilt\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "466 U.S. 648", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Cronic", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "USA v. Michel", "court": "D.D.C.", "date": "2024-08-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/475/USA_v._Michel_DDC_USA_30_August_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "see also United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 666 (1984) (requiring defendants to \"point[]\" ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "595 U.S. 140", "asserted_case_name": "Hemphill v. New York", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "USA v. Michel", "court": "D.D.C.", "date": "2024-08-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/475/USA_v._Michel_DDC_USA_30_August_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "side.\" Hemphill v. New York, 595 U.S. 140, 152 (2022); see also United States v. Brown, 921 F.2d ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hemphill v. New York, 595 U.S. 140.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "2017 WL 2483620", "asserted_case_name": "United Therapeutics Corp. v. Watson Labs, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "Iovino cites the following two cases that do not appear to exist: United Therapeutics Corp. v. Watson Labs, Inc., No. 3:17-cv-00081, 2017 WL 2483620, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 7, 2017), and United States v. Mosby, 2021 WL 2827893, at *4 (D. Md. July 7, 2021).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United Therapeutics Corp. v. Watson Labs, Inc., 2017 WL 2483620.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2021 WL 2827893", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Mosby", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "Iovino cites the following two cases that do not appear to exist: United Therapeutics Corp. v. Watson Labs, Inc., No. 3:17-cv-00081, 2017 WL 2483620, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 7, 2017), and United States v. Mosby, 2021 WL 2827893, at *4 (D. Md. July 7, 2021).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Mosby, 2021 WL 2827893.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "113 F. Supp. 3d 1125", "asserted_case_name": "Menocal", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "she indicates that Menocal, a decision she puts great weight on in her objections, is a reported opinion at 113 F. Supp. 3d 1125, even though the reporter reference denotes a much earlier decision in the same litigation that had nothing to do with Touhy regulations.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Menocal, 113 F. Supp. 3d 1125.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_unverified_name", "category": "not_checked", "verificationLabel": "Could not be checked — not enough surrounding context to verify", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "citation resolves but the brief's case name could not be checked against it" }, { "citation": "930 F.3d 307", "asserted_case_name": "Graves v. Lioi", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "She also cites a Supreme Court opinion and Fourth Circuit opinion that exist, but attributes quotations to those decisions that do not appear in them. (See id. at 17 (representing that Graves v. Lioi, 930 F.3d 307 (4th Cir. 2019), includes the phrase \"decided by necessary implication\") ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Graves v. Lioi, 930 F.3d 307.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "590 U.S. 644", "asserted_case_name": "Bostock v. Clayton Cnty.", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "19 (representing that Bostock v. Clayton Cnty., 590 U.S. 644 (2020), includes the phrase \"make a mockery of the law\").)", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Bostock v. Clayton Cnty., 590 U.S. 644.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "293 F. 1013", "asserted_case_name": "Frye v. United States", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Matter of Weber", "court": "CC New York", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2024/2024-ny-slip-op-24258.html" }, "quote": "expert testimony, in that the same is required to be generally accepted in its relevant field (see Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 [D.C. Cir. 1923]).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "38 NY3d 367", "asserted_case_name": "People v. Wakefield", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Matter of Weber", "court": "CC New York", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2024/2024-ny-slip-op-24258.html" }, "quote": "in industry specific artificial intelligence technology is generally accepted (People v. Wakefield, 38 NY3d 367 [2022] [allowing artificial intelligence assisted software analysis of DNA in a criminal case]).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "People v. Wakefield, 38 NY3d 367.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "11 cases share this name at a different citation, but this reporter is outside the set Cite11 has confirmed court-family coverage for -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2023 WL 7490841", "asserted_case_name": "Mescall v. Renaissance at Antiquity", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Associates, Ltd.", "court": "W.D. Virginia", "date": "2024-10-10", "url": "https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/5:2021cv00064/123582/177/" }, "quote": "the attorney is still responsible for ensuring the filing is accurate and does not contain fabricated caselaw or quotations. See, e.g., Mescall v. Renaissance at Antiquity, No. 3:23-cv-00332, 2023 WL 7490841, at *1 n.1 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 13, 2023) (citi...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mescall v. Renaissance at Antiquity, 2023 WL 7490841.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "T.C. Memo 1998-269", "asserted_case_name": "Schluter v. Commissioner", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Thomas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue", "court": "US Tax Court", "date": "2024-10-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/648/Thomas_v._CIR_USA_23_October_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Petitioner's counsel cited Schluter v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-269. But Schluter v. Commissioner is actually T.C. Memo. 1970-67, a dependency exemption case. And T.C. Memo. 1998-269 is actually Schmitt v. Commissioner, a method of accounting case.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Schluter v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1998-269.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a case shares this name at a different citation, but this reporter is outside the set Cite11 has confirmed court-family coverage for -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "T.C. Memo 1969-15", "asserted_case_name": "Meneguzzo v. Commissioner", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Thomas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue", "court": "US Tax Court", "date": "2024-10-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/648/Thomas_v._CIR_USA_23_October_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Petitioner's counsel cited Meneguzzo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1969-15. But Meneguzzo v. Commissioner is actually 43 T.C. 824 (1965), a tip reporting case. And T.C. Memo. 1969-15 is actually B-E-C-K McLaughlin & Assoc. v. Renegotiation Board, an excess profits case.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Meneguzzo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1969-15.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a case shares this name at a different citation, but this reporter is outside the set Cite11 has confirmed court-family coverage for -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "T.C. Memo 2011-194", "asserted_case_name": "Gagliardi v. Commissioner", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Thomas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue", "court": "US Tax Court", "date": "2024-10-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/648/Thomas_v._CIR_USA_23_October_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Petitioner's counsel cited Gagliardi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2011-194. But Gagliardi v. Commissioner is actually T.C. Memo. 2008-10, a gambling loss case. And T.C. Memo. 2011-194 is actually Layton v. Commissioner, a collection case.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Gagliardi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2011-194.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: LILLIAN LAYTON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "LILLIAN LAYTON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to LILLIAN LAYTON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, not Gagliardi v. Commissioner" }, { "citation": "143 T.C. 183", "asserted_case_name": "Dynamo Holdings L.P. v. Commissioner", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Thomas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue", "court": "US Tax Court", "date": "2024-10-23", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/648/Thomas_v._CIR_USA_23_October_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "For example, in Dynamo Holdings L.P. v. Commissioner, 143 T.C. 183 (2014), we were asked to opine on a party's use of predictive coding to assist it in responding to discovery.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Dynamo Holdings L.P. v. Commissioner, 143 T.C. 183.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "836 F.2d 1156", "asserted_case_name": "Hudson v. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mortazavi v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2024-10-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/245/Mortazavi_v._Booz_Allen_Hamilton_US_DC_Central_California_October_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "A court has \"wide discretion in determining the appropriate sanction for a Rule 11 violation.\" Hudson v. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc., 836 F.2d 1156, 1163 (9th Cir. 1987).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hudson v. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc., 836 F.2d 1156.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "895 F.2d 1267", "asserted_case_name": "Ayers v. City of Richmond", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mortazavi v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2024-10-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/245/Mortazavi_v._Booz_Allen_Hamilton_US_DC_Central_California_October_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Ayers v. City of Richmond, 895 F.2d 1267, 1269 (9th Cir. 1990) (\"An award of sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f) is within the discretion of the district court.\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ayers v. City of Richmond, 895 F.2d 1267.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "498 U.S. 533", "asserted_case_name": "Bus. Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Commc'ns Enterprises, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mortazavi v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2024-10-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/245/Mortazavi_v._Booz_Allen_Hamilton_US_DC_Central_California_October_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "Bus. Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Commc'ns Enterprises, Inc., 498 U.S. 533, 542 (1991) (\"A signature certifies to the court that the signer has read the document, has conducted a reasonable inquiry into the facts and the law and is satisfied that the document is well grounded in both, and is acting without any improper motive.\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Bus. Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Commc'ns Enterprises, Inc., 498 U.S. 533.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "987 F.2d 622", "asserted_case_name": "Yagman v. Republic Ins.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Mortazavi v. Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2024-10-30", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/245/Mortazavi_v._Booz_Allen_Hamilton_US_DC_Central_California_October_30_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "see Yagman v. Republic Ins., 987 F.2d 622, 628 (9th Cir. 1993) (\"A violation of [Rule 11] does not require subjective bad faith.\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Yagman v. Republic Ins., 987 F.2d 622.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "2020 WL 1882334", "asserted_case_name": "Hogan v. Allstate Insurance Co.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Berry v. Stewart", "court": "D. Kansas", "date": "2024-11-14", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/465/Berry_v._Stewart_D._Kansas_14_November_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "As far as the Court can tell, this case does not exist. The Westlaw database number pulls up no case; the Court has found no case in CM/ECF between the parties \"Hogan\" and \"Allstate Insurance Co.\" Moreover, docket numbers in this district have at least four digits—not three—after the case-type designation, and there is no judge in this district with the initials \"JPM.\"", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hogan v. Allstate Insurance Co., 2020 WL 1882334.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "500 F. App'x 273", "asserted_case_name": "Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "As observed by Goodyear in its reply (#42), Monk's Response cites two cases that do not exist. The nonexistent cases are \"Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273, 276 (5th Cir. 2012) (unpublished)\" ... also from the hallucinatory case, Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273 (5th Cir. 2012).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Troy BROOKS, Defendant-Appellant", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Troy BROOKS, Defendant-Appellant", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Troy BROOKS, Defendant-Appellant, not Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC" }, { "citation": "1994 WL 714026", "asserted_case_name": "Beets v. Texas Instruments, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The nonexistent cases are \"Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273, 276 (5th Cir. 2012) (unpublished)\" and \"Beets v. Texas Instruments, Inc., No. 94-10034, 1994 WL 714026, at *3 (5th Cir. Dec. 16, 1994) (unpublished).\"", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Beets v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 1994 WL 714026.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "132 S.W.3d 603", "asserted_case_name": "Morales v. SimuFlite Training Int'l, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: Morales v. SimuFlite Training Int'l, Inc., 132 S.W.3d 603 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004, no pet.); White v. FCI USA, Inc., 319 F.3d 672 (5th Cir. 2003); Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 798 F.3d 222 (5th Cir. 2015); Texas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds, 904 S.W.2d 629 (Tex. 1995); Physio GP, Inc. v. Naifeh, 306 S.W.3d 886 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); City of Midland v. O'Bryant, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000), as well as from the hallucinatory case, Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273 (5th Cir. 2012).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Morales v. SimuFlite Training Int'l, Inc., 132 S.W.3d 603.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "319 F.3d 672", "asserted_case_name": "White v. FCI USA, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: Morales v. SimuFlite Training Int'l, Inc. ...; White v. FCI USA, Inc., 319 F.3d 672 (5th Cir. 2003); Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 798 F.3d 222 (5th Cir. 2015) ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "White v. FCI USA, Inc., 319 F.3d 672.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "798 F.3d 222", "asserted_case_name": "Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: ...; Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 798 F.3d 222 (5th Cir. 2015); Texas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds, 904 S.W.2d 629 (Tex. 1995) ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., 798 F.3d 222.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "904 S.W.2d 629", "asserted_case_name": "Texas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: ...; Texas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds, 904 S.W.2d 629 (Tex. 1995); Physio GP, Inc. v. Naifeh, 306 S.W.3d 886 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.) ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Texas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Hinds, 904 S.W.2d 629.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "306 S.W.3d 886", "asserted_case_name": "Physio GP, Inc. v. Naifeh", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: ...; Physio GP, Inc. v. Naifeh, 306 S.W.3d 886 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); City of Midland v. O'Bryant, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000) ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Physio GP, Inc. v. Naifeh, 306 S.W.3d 886.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "18 S.W.3d 209", "asserted_case_name": "City of Midland v. O'Bryant", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "The Response cites nonexistent quotations from the following cases: ...; City of Midland v. O'Bryant, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000), as well as from the hallucinatory case, Roca v. King's Creek Plantation, LLC, 500 F. App'x 273 (5th Cir. 2012).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "City of Midland v. O'Bryant, 18 S.W.3d 209.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "91 F.4th 610", "asserted_case_name": "Park v. Kim", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "\"At the very least, the duties imposed by Rule 11 require that attorneys read, and thereby confirm the existence and validity of, the legal authorities on which they rely.\" Park v. Kim, 91 F.4th 610, 615 (2d Cir. 2024); see Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 448 (S.D.N.Y. 2023).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Park v. Kim, 91 F.4th 610.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "678 F. Supp. 3d 443", "asserted_case_name": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "\"Many harms flow from the submission of fake opinions.\" Mata, 678 F. Supp. 3d at 448.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "2024 WL 3520170", "asserted_case_name": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Assocs., Ltd.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gauthier v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.", "court": "E.D. Texas", "date": "2024-11-25", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/238/Gauthier_v._Goodyear_US_DC_Eastern_Texas_November_25_2024.pdf" }, "quote": "\"This silence is deafening.\" Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Assocs., Ltd., No. 5:21-CV-00064, 2024 WL 3520170, at *7 (W.D. Va. July 24, 2024).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Iovino v. Michael Stapleton Assocs., Ltd., 2024 WL 3520170.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "509 U.S. 579", "asserted_case_name": "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Kohls v. Ellison", "court": "D. Minnesota", "date": "2025-01-10", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348.46.0.pdf" }, "quote": "At a minimum, expert testimony is supposed to be reliable. Fed. R. Evid. 702; see also Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 589 (1993) (explaining that expert testimony must be \"not only relevant, but reliable\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "2019 WL 2550660", "asserted_case_name": "Acosta v. Mezcal, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Kohls v. Ellison", "court": "D. Minnesota", "date": "2025-01-10", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348.46.0.pdf" }, "quote": "it \"alert[s] declarants to the gravity of their undertaking and thereby have a meaningful effect on truth-telling and reliability.\" Acosta v. Mezcal, Inc., No. 17-cv-0931 (JKB), 2019 WL 2550660, at *2 (D. Md. June 20, 2019).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Acosta v. Mezcal, Inc., 2019 WL 2550660.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "722 F.3d 483", "asserted_case_name": "In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Kohls v. Ellison", "court": "D. Minnesota", "date": "2025-01-10", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348.46.0.pdf" }, "quote": "see also In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d 483, 488 (2d Cir. 2013) (explaining that the \"under penalty of perjury\" affirmation \"impresses upon the declarant the specific punishment to which he or she is subjected for certifying to false statements\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d 483.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In re WORLD TRADE CENTER DISASTER SITE LITIGATION. Zoila Cortez, Miguel Alfaro Lobo v. City of New York", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In re WORLD TRADE CENTER DISASTER SITE LITIGATION. Zoila Cortez, Miguel Alfaro Lobo v. City of New York) contains In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig.'s party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "2023 WL 6976510", "asserted_case_name": "Morgan v. Cmty. Against Violence", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Kohls v. Ellison", "court": "D. Minnesota", "date": "2025-01-10", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348/gov.uscourts.mnd.220348.46.0.pdf" }, "quote": "\"wasting the opposing party's time and money, the Court's time and resources, and reputational harms to the legal system (to name a few).\" Morgan v. Cmty. Against Violence, No. 23-cv-353-WPJ/JMR, 2023 WL 6976510, at *8 (D.N.M. Oct. 23, 2023).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Morgan v. Cmty. Against Violence, 2023 WL 6976510.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "649 F. 3d 651", "asserted_case_name": "Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Govs. of the Fed. Reserve Sys.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Pittman cites Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Govs. of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 649 F. 3d 651, 657 (D.C. Cir. 2011), Hogan v. AT&T, Inc., 917 F. Supp. 1275, 1280 (S.D. Tex. 1994), and Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC, 290 F. Supp. 3d 883, 893 (S.D. Tex. 2018), which do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Govs. of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 649 F. 3d 651.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "917 F. Supp. 1275", "asserted_case_name": "Hogan v. AT&T, Inc.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Pittman cites Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Govs. of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 649 F. 3d 651, 657 (D.C. Cir. 2011), Hogan v. AT&T, Inc., 917 F. Supp. 1275, 1280 (S.D. Tex. 1994), and Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC, 290 F. Supp. 3d 883, 893 (S.D. Tex. 2018), which do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hogan v. AT&T, Inc., 917 F. Supp. 1275.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America Ex Rel. Mervin GREEN, Etc., Petitioners, v. Odie WASHINGTON, Et Al., Respondents", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America Ex Rel. Mervin GREEN, Etc., Petitioners, v. Odie WASHINGTON, Et Al., Respondents", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America Ex Rel. Mervin GREEN, Etc., Petitioners, v. Odie WASHINGTON, Et Al., Respondents, not Hogan v. AT&T, Inc." }, { "citation": "290 F. Supp. 3d 883", "asserted_case_name": "Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Pittman cites Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Govs. of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 649 F. 3d 651, 657 (D.C. Cir. 2011), Hogan v. AT&T, Inc., 917 F. Supp. 1275, 1280 (S.D. Tex. 1994), and Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC, 290 F. Supp. 3d 883, 893 (S.D. Tex. 2018), which do not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC, 290 F. Supp. 3d 883.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Dennis TROYER v. NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Dennis TROYER v. NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Dennis TROYER v. NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION, not Head v. Chicora Life Ctr., LLC" }, { "citation": "213 F. Supp. 2d 135", "asserted_case_name": "Cruz v. Aramark Servs., Inc.", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The Court located one case captioned Cruz v. Aramark, but it was in a different reporter, by a different court, and a later year. And that case does not address the numerosity requirement in Title VII or TCHRA.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Cruz v. Aramark Servs., Inc., 213 F. Supp. 2d 135.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Elizabeth A. MARCZESKI, Plaintiff, v. Susan B. HANDY, Et Al, Defendants", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Elizabeth A. MARCZESKI, Plaintiff, v. Susan B. HANDY, Et Al, Defendants", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Elizabeth A. MARCZESKI, Plaintiff, v. Susan B. HANDY, Et Al, Defendants, not Cruz v. Aramark Servs., Inc." }, { "citation": "640 S.W. 2d 232", "asserted_case_name": "TIG Ins. Co. v. Carter", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The Court could not locate a case entitled TIG Ins. Co. v. Carter, and the case at 640 S.W. 2d 232 is a wrongful foreclosure case captioned Ogden v. Gibraltar Savings Association.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "TIG Ins. Co. v. Carter, 640 S.W. 2d 232.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Claude W. OGDEN, Jr., Petitioner, v. GIBRALTAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION, Respondent", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Claude W. OGDEN, Jr., Petitioner, v. GIBRALTAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION, Respondent", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Claude W. OGDEN, Jr., Petitioner, v. GIBRALTAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION, Respondent, not TIG Ins. Co. v. Carter" }, { "citation": "501 U.S. 32", "asserted_case_name": "Chambers v. NASCO", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "First, it may impose sanctions as a valid exercise of its inherent power. Chambers v. NASCO, 501 U.S. 32, 46–51 (1991).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Chambers v. NASCO, 501 U.S. 32.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "151 F.3d 217", "asserted_case_name": "Crowe v. Smith", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Second, Fifth Circuit law permits district courts to impose \"'petty fines\" as noncompensatory sanctions in a \"summary manner.\" Crowe v. Smith, 151 F.3d 217, 228 (5th Cir. 1998).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Crowe v. Smith, 151 F.3d 217.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "153 F.3d 242", "asserted_case_name": "Edwards v. General Motors Corp.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Gonzalez v. Texas Taxpayers and Research Association", "court": "W.D. Texas", "date": "2025-01-29", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/576/Gonzalez_v._Texas_Taxpayers_and_Research_Association_USA_29_January_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "the Court may look to statutory authority if \"evidence of bad faith, improper motive, or reckless disregard of the duty owed to the court\" are involved. Edwards v. General Motors Corp., 153 F.3d 242, 246 (5th Cir. 1998).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Edwards v. General Motors Corp., 153 F.3d 242.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "916 F.3d 1302", "asserted_case_name": "Collins v. Daniels", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Wadsworth v. Walmart (Morgan & Morgan)", "court": "D. Wyoming", "date": "2025-02-24", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014.181.0_1.pdf" }, "quote": "P. 11 for abuse of discretion. Collins v. Daniels, 916 F.3d 1302, 1319 (10th Cir. 2019).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Collins v. Daniels, 916 F.3d 1302.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "678 F. Supp. 3d 443", "asserted_case_name": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Wadsworth v. Walmart (Morgan & Morgan)", "court": "D. Wyoming", "date": "2025-02-24", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014.181.0_1.pdf" }, "quote": "using a fake opinion to support an argument is a violation of Rule 11(b)(2). See Mata, 678 F. Supp. 3d at 461.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate (cached)" }, { "citation": "663 F. Supp. 3d 466", "asserted_case_name": "Williams v. The Ests. LLC", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Wadsworth v. Walmart (Morgan & Morgan)", "court": "D. Wyoming", "date": "2025-02-24", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014.181.0_1.pdf" }, "quote": "This likewise constitutes a violation. Williams v. The Ests. LLC, 663 F. Supp. 3d 466, 478 ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Williams v. The Ests. LLC, 663 F. Supp. 3d 466.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "78 F.3d 431", "asserted_case_name": "In re Keegan Mgmt. Co., Sec. Litig.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Wadsworth v. Walmart (Morgan & Morgan)", "court": "D. Wyoming", "date": "2025-02-24", "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014/gov.uscourts.wyd.64014.181.0_1.pdf" }, "quote": "on other grounds by In re Keegan Mgmt. Co., Sec. Litig., 78 F.3d 431, 434 (9th Cir. 1996) ...", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "In re Keegan Mgmt. Co., Sec. Litig., 78 F.3d 431.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In re: KEEGAN MANAGEMENT CO., SECURITIES LITIGATION. Michael MOORE, and Lieff, Cabraser & Heimann Elizabeth J. Cabraser v. KEEGAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Defendants-Appellees Michael MOORE, and Richard L. Jaeger Feldman, Waldman & Kline v. KEEGAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Delaware corporation", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In re: KEEGAN MANAGEMENT CO., SECURITIES LITIGATION. Michael MOORE, and Lieff, Cabraser & Heimann Elizabeth J. Cabraser v. KEEGAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Defendants-Appellees Michael MOORE, and Richard L. Jaeger Feldman, Waldman & Kline v. KEEGAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Delaware corporation) contains In re Keegan Mgmt. Co., Sec. Litig.'s party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "897 F. Supp. 2d 1067", "asserted_case_name": "McNally v. Eyeglass World, LLC", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "In his Withdrawal Motion, he cited \"McNally v. Eyeglass World, LLC, 897 F. Supp. 2d 1067 (D. Nev. 2012)\" ... Both cases were non existent and appeared to be Al \"hallucinations.\"", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "McNally v. Eyeglass World, LLC, 897 F. Supp. 2d 1067.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: UNITED STATES of America, ex rel., Richard J. KLEIN v. OMEROS CORPORATION, a Washington corporation, and Gregory Demopulos, an individual", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "UNITED STATES of America, ex rel., Richard J. KLEIN v. OMEROS CORPORATION, a Washington corporation, and Gregory Demopulos, an individual", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to UNITED STATES of America, ex rel., Richard J. KLEIN v. OMEROS CORPORATION, a Washington corporation, and Gregory Demopulos, an individual, not McNally v. Eyeglass World, LLC" }, { "citation": "460 F.3d 860", "asserted_case_name": "Behm v. Lockheed Martin Corp.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "in his Appeal Motion, he cited \"Behm v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 460 F.3d 860 (7th Cir. 2006).\" ... Both cases were non existent and appeared to be Al \"hallucinations.\"", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Behm v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 460 F.3d 860.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: RAPID TEST PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "RAPID TEST PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to RAPID TEST PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee, not Behm v. Lockheed Martin Corp." }, { "citation": "517 U.S. 820", "asserted_case_name": "Degen v. United States", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Mr. Rajan also cited \"Degen v. United States, 517 U.S. 820 (1996)\" in his Appeal Motion, but this case did not support his proposition. In fact, Degen relates to the rule of disentitlement, a completely different point of law than Mr. Rajan cited it for.", "note": "A genuine, correctly-resolving citation from the brief -- the court's objection is to the proposition it was cited for, not its existence, which is outside Cite11's checked scope.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Degen v. United States, 517 U.S. 820.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "259 F.R.D. 81", "asserted_case_name": "Dow Chemical Canada Inc. v. HRD Corp.", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "the Appeal Motion cited \"Dow Chemical Canada Inc. v. HRD Corp., 259 F.R.D. 81, 86 (D. Del. 2009)\" ... A quick reference to Dow Chemical's history in Westlaw or Lexis reveals that this decision was later reversed and vacated.", "note": "A genuine, correctly-resolving citation later superseded by its own case history -- not a fabrication.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Dow Chemical Canada Inc. v. HRD Corp., 259 F.R.D. 81.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "775 F.2d 535", "asserted_case_name": "Eavenson, Auchmuty Greenwald v. Holtzman", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "and \"Eavenson, Auchmuty Greenwald v. Holtzman, 775 F.2d 535, 537 (3d Cir. 1985),\" both of which are not good law. ... a quick review of Westlaw or Lexis's case treatment tools reveals that Eavenson was impliedly overruled for the very proposition that Mr. Rajan cited it for.", "note": "A genuine, correctly-resolving citation whose holding has since been superseded -- not a fabrication of the case itself.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Eavenson, Auchmuty Greenwald v. Holtzman, 775 F.2d 535.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "835 F.2d 479", "asserted_case_name": "Gaiardo v. Ethyl Corp.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "\"Stop, Think, Investigate and Research\" before filing papers either to initiate a suit or to conduct the litigation.\" Gaiardo v. Ethyl Corp., 835 F.2d 479, 482 (3d Cir. 1987).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Gaiardo v. Ethyl Corp., 835 F.2d 479.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "267 F.3d 331", "asserted_case_name": "Comuso v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "See Comuso v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp., 267 F.3d 331, 339 (3d Cir. 2001) (\"Therefore, our decisions in Eavenson and In re Tutu Wells are no longer good law to the extent that they conflict with Cunningham.\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Comuso v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp., 267 F.3d 331.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "527 U.S. 198", "asserted_case_name": "Cunningham v. Hamilton Cnty., Ohio", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (1)", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-02-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/246/Bunce_v._Visual_Technology_Innovations_US_DC_Eastern_Pennsylvania_February_27_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Cunningham v. Hamilton Cnty., Ohio, 527 U.S. 198, 209 (1999) (\"we do not think that the appealability of a Rule 37 sanction imposed on an attorney should turn on the attorney's continued participation ...\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Cunningham v. Hamilton Cnty., Ohio, 527 U.S. 198.", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_unverified_name", "category": "not_checked", "verificationLabel": "Could not be checked — not enough surrounding context to verify", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "citation resolves but the brief's case name could not be checked against it" }, { "citation": "518 F. Supp 3d 708 (D.N.M. 2021)", "asserted_case_name": "Moncada v. Ruiz", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "NOT_EXTRACTED", "syntheticText": "Moncada v. Ruiz, 518 F. Supp 3d 708 (D.N.M. 2021)." }, { "citation": "382 F. Supp 3d 1209 (D.N.M. 2019)", "asserted_case_name": "Vega-Mendoza v. Homeland Security", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "NOT_EXTRACTED", "syntheticText": "Vega-Mendoza v. Homeland Security, 382 F. Supp 3d 1209 (D.N.M. 2019)." }, { "citation": "541 F. Supp 3d 1154 (D.N.M. 2021)", "asserted_case_name": "Morales v. ICE Field Office Director", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "NOT_EXTRACTED", "syntheticText": "Morales v. ICE Field Office Director, 541 F. Supp 3d 1154 (D.N.M. 2021)." }, { "citation": "130 F. Supp. 3d 1052 (N.D. Tex. 2015)", "asserted_case_name": "Meza v. United States Attorney General", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Meza v. United States Attorney General, 130 F. Supp. 3d 1052 (N.D. Tex. 2015).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Eric C. DETERS v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Linda Gosnell, Jay Garrett, Sarah Coker, Thomas Glover, and Steve Pulliam", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Eric C. DETERS v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Linda Gosnell, Jay Garrett, Sarah Coker, Thomas Glover, and Steve Pulliam", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Eric C. DETERS v. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Linda Gosnell, Jay Garrett, Sarah Coker, Thomas Glover, and Steve Pulliam, not Meza v. United States Attorney General" }, { "citation": "298 F. Supp. 3d 1366 (D.N.M. 2018)", "asserted_case_name": "Hernandez v. Sessions", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hernandez v. Sessions, 298 F. Supp. 3d 1366 (D.N.M. 2018).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: DYNAENERGETICS U.S. INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, Maverick Tube Corporation, Defendant-Intervenor.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "DYNAENERGETICS U.S. INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, Maverick Tube Corporation, Defendant-Intervenor.", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to DYNAENERGETICS U.S. INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, Maverick Tube Corporation, Defendant-Intervenor., not Hernandez v. Sessions" }, { "citation": "338 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.N.M. 2020)", "asserted_case_name": "Ramirez v. DHS", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "As noted by the court in the March 11, 2025 Order to Show Cause and by Mr. Millan in response to said order, there were at least six non-existent cases that Petitioner used in support of her arguments. (See Docs. 11; 23 at 4.) The six cases were fake and likely the handiwork of a ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) program's hallucinations.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ramirez v. DHS, 338 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.N.M. 2020).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Wilmer Garcia RAMIREZ v. U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Wilmer Garcia RAMIREZ v. U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Wilmer Garcia RAMIREZ v. U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, not Ramirez v. DHS" }, { "citation": "855 F.2d 668, 672 (10th Cir. 1988)", "asserted_case_name": "Adamson v. Bowen", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "In determining whether sanctions are warranted, the trial court conducts a two-step analysis. Adamson v. Bowen, 855 F.2d 668, 672 (10th Cir. 1988).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Adamson v. Bowen, 855 F.2d 668, 672 (10th Cir. 1988).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 461 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)", "asserted_case_name": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Moreover, courts have found that \"using a fake opinion to support an argument is [also] a violation of Rule 11(b)(2).\" Id. (citing Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 461 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 461 (S.D.N.Y. 2023).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate (cached)" }, { "citation": "2025 WL 608073, at *4 (D. Wyo. Feb. 24, 2025)", "asserted_case_name": "Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Dehghani v. Castro", "court": "D. New Mexico", "date": "2025-04-02", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/310/Dehghani_v_Castro_USA_New_Mexico_April_2_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "\"[B]lind reliance on another attorney can be an improper delegation of [an attorney's nondelegable] duty and a violation of Rule 11.\" See Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc., --- F.R.D. ---, 2025 WL 608073, at *4 (D. Wyo. Feb. 24, 2025) (citations omitted).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc., 2025 WL 608073, at *4 (D. Wyo. Feb. 24, 2025).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "No. 1712 EDA 2018, 2019 WL 1396975, at *3 (Pa. Super. Ct. Mar. 27, 2019)", "asserted_case_name": "Tinch v. Video Indus. Servs., Inc.", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-04-10", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/244/Bevins_v._Colgate_Palmolive_US_DC_Eastern_Penn._April_10_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The Court's search did not locate this case or identify a plausible typographical error in the citation. The case bearing this caption, Tinch v. Video Indus. Servs., Inc., is a 1997 opinion by the Supreme Court of North Carolina and is irrelevant to this case. The Westlaw citation provided by Attorney Palazzo, \"2019 WL 1396975,\" corresponds to Dolberry v. Jakob, 2019 WL 1396975, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2019). The case number provided by Attorney Palazzo, \"1712 EDA 2018,\" corresponds to an irrelevant criminal appeal.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Tinch v. Video Indus. Servs., Inc., No. 1712 EDA 2018, 2019 WL 1396975, at *3 (Pa. Super. Ct. Mar. 27, 2019).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "No. 95-5560, 1997 WL 436713, at *8 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 1997)", "asserted_case_name": "Burton v. Danek", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-04-10", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/244/Bevins_v._Colgate_Palmolive_US_DC_Eastern_Penn._April_10_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Again, the Court's search did not locate this case or detect a possible typographical error in the citation. The Westlaw citation provided by Attorney Palazzo, \"1997 WL 436713,\" corresponds to Top Choice Distributors, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 1997 WL 436713, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. July 22, 1997), aff'd, 138 F.3d 463 (2d Cir. 1998). The case number provided by Attorney Palazzo, \"Case No. 95-5560,\" corresponds to a case entitled Daniels v. Copley Pharma., et al. which was terminated before the date included in Attorney Palazzo's citation.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Burton v. Danek, No. 95-5560, 1997 WL 436713, at *8 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 1997).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)", "asserted_case_name": "Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-04-10", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/244/Bevins_v._Colgate_Palmolive_US_DC_Eastern_Penn._April_10_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "To survive a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b)(6), a plaintiff must include sufficient facts in the complaint that, accepted as true, \"state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.\" Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "855 F.2d 1080, 1091 (3d Cir. 1988)", "asserted_case_name": "Napier v. Thirty or More Unidentified Fed. Agents, Emps. or Officers", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Bevins v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.", "court": "E.D. Pennsylvania", "date": "2025-04-10", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/244/Bevins_v._Colgate_Palmolive_US_DC_Eastern_Penn._April_10_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The Third Circuit has acknowledged that, \"[t]o satisfy the affirmative duty imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, an attorney must inquire into both the facts and the law before filing papers with the court.\" Napier v. Thirty or More Unidentified Fed. Agents, Emps. or Officers, 855 F.2d 1080, 1091 (3d Cir. 1988).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Napier v. Thirty or More Unidentified Fed. Agents, Emps. or Officers, 855 F.2d 1080, 1091 (3d Cir. 1988).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_unverified_name", "category": "not_checked", "verificationLabel": "Could not be checked — not enough surrounding context to verify", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "citation resolves but the brief's case name could not be checked against it" }, { "citation": "406 F.2d 1004, 1006 (2d Cir. 1969)", "asserted_case_name": "Klein v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Klein v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., 406 F.2d 1004, 1006 (2d Cir. 1969), see ECF No. 19 ¶ 4, does not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Klein v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., 406 F.2d 1004, 1006 (2d Cir. 1969).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: SPARTANS INDUSTRIES, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "SPARTANS INDUSTRIES, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to SPARTANS INDUSTRIES, INC., Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, not Klein v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co." }, { "citation": "202 F. Supp. 2d 290, 292 (W.D.N.Y. 2002)", "asserted_case_name": "Gordon v. N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Gordon v. N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co., 202 F. Supp. 2d 290, 292 (W.D.N.Y. 2002), see ECF No. 19 ¶ 5, does not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Gordon v. N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co., 202 F. Supp. 2d 290, 292 (W.D.N.Y. 2002).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Frank FOURNIER, Plaintiff, v. McCann ERICKSON and Microsoft Corporation, Defendants", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Frank FOURNIER, Plaintiff, v. McCann ERICKSON and Microsoft Corporation, Defendants", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Frank FOURNIER, Plaintiff, v. McCann ERICKSON and Microsoft Corporation, Defendants, not Gordon v. N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co." }, { "citation": "2010 WL 11627832, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 1, 2010)", "asserted_case_name": "Mitchell v. JCG Industries", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Mitchell v. JCG Industries, 2010 WL 11627832, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 1, 2010), see ECF No. 19 ¶ 6, does not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mitchell v. JCG Industries, 2010 WL 11627832, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 1, 2010).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2005 WL 19904045, at *3 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 17, 2005)", "asserted_case_name": "Hollander v. Sweeney", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Hollander v. Sweeney, 2005 WL 19904045, at *3 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 17, 2005), see ECF No. 19 ¶ 7, does not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hollander v. Sweeney, 2005 WL 19904045, at *3 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 17, 2005).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "2019 WL 3452601, at *2 (W.D. Ark. July 31, 2019)", "asserted_case_name": "Davis v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Inc. Co.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Davis v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Inc. Co., 2019 WL 3452601, at *2 (W.D. Ark. July 31, 2019), ECF No. 19 ¶ 8, does not exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Davis v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Inc. Co., 2019 WL 3452601, at *2 (W.D. Ark. July 31, 2019).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "91 F.4th 610, 614 (2d Cir. 2024)", "asserted_case_name": "Park v. Kim", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Rule 11 imposes a duty on attorneys to certify that they have conducted a reasonable inquiry and have determined that any papers filed with the court are well grounded in fact, [and] legally tenable. Park v. Kim, 91 F.4th 610, 614 (2d Cir. 2024) (citation omitted) (emphasis added).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Park v. Kim, 91 F.4th 610, 614 (2d Cir. 2024).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 459 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)", "asserted_case_name": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Benjamin v. Costco Wholesale Corp", "court": "E.D. New York", "date": "2025-04-24", "url": "https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-ed-new-yor/117206693.html" }, "quote": "Accordingly, Rule 11 prohibits attorneys from \"making frivolous legal arguments.\" Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 459 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) (citation omitted).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443, 459 (S.D.N.Y. 2023).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate (cached)" }, { "citation": "608 F. Supp. 2d 269 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)", "asserted_case_name": "Shell Petroleum N.V. v. Republic of Costa Rica", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Flowz Digital LLC v. Caroline Dalal", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-05", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/443/Flowz_Digital_v._Caroline_Dalal_C.D._California_USA_May_5_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Moreover, after multiple search attempts, the Court is unable to locate Shell Petroleum N.V. v. Republic of Costa Rica, 608 F. Supp. 2d 269 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Plaintiff shall attach the case to its response to this order to show cause.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Shell Petroleum N.V. v. Republic of Costa Rica, 608 F. Supp. 2d 269 (S.D.N.Y. 2009).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Amir FAGHRI, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Et Al., Defendants", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Amir FAGHRI, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Et Al., Defendants", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Amir FAGHRI, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Et Al., Defendants, not Shell Petroleum N.V. v. Republic of Costa Rica" }, { "citation": "411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005)", "asserted_case_name": "In re Daou Systems, Inc.", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Flowz Digital LLC v. Caroline Dalal", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-05", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/443/Flowz_Digital_v._Caroline_Dalal_C.D._California_USA_May_5_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The relevance of two of Plaintiff's cited cases—In re Daou Systems, Inc., 411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005) and S.E.C. v. Cross Financial Services, Inc., 908 F. Supp. 718 (C.D. Cal. 1995)—appears to be tenuous. Counsel states that he cited to In re Daou Systems \"to support the broader principle that when a party asserts claims based on injuries it directly suffered, such claims are properly treated as direct rather than derivative.\" That case, however, did not address the difference between direct and derivative actions.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "In re Daou Systems, Inc., 411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In re DAOU SYSTEMS, INC., Securities Litigation, Greg Sparling Eugene Krabbenhoft Patrick De Kruyff, Esq. Robert Zaretsky Rod Ford Thomas V. Hagman Richard W. Walsh Richard Toribio Paul Rabin v. Georges Daou Daniel Daou Fred McGee Robert McNeill John Moragne Daou Systems, Inc., In re Daou Systems, Inc., Securities Litigation, Greg Sparling Eugene Krabbenhoft Patrick De Kruyff, Esq. Robert Zaretsky Rod Ford Thomas V. Hagman Richard W. Walsh Richar Toribio Paul Rabin v. Georges Daou Daniel Daou Fred McGee Robert McNeill John Moragne, and Daou Systems, Inc.", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In re DAOU SYSTEMS, INC., Securities Litigation, Greg Sparling Eugene Krabbenhoft Patrick De Kruyff, Esq. Robert Zaretsky Rod Ford Thomas V. Hagman Richard W. Walsh Richard Toribio Paul Rabin v. Georges Daou Daniel Daou Fred McGee Robert McNeill John Moragne Daou Systems, Inc., In re Daou Systems, Inc., Securities Litigation, Greg Sparling Eugene Krabbenhoft Patrick De Kruyff, Esq. Robert Zaretsky Rod Ford Thomas V. Hagman Richard W. Walsh Richar Toribio Paul Rabin v. Georges Daou Daniel Daou Fred McGee Robert McNeill John Moragne, and Daou Systems, Inc.) contains In re Daou Systems, Inc.'s party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "908 F. Supp. 718 (C.D. Cal. 1995)", "asserted_case_name": "S.E.C. v. Cross Financial Services, Inc.", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Flowz Digital LLC v. Caroline Dalal", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-05", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/443/Flowz_Digital_v._Caroline_Dalal_C.D._California_USA_May_5_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "He explains that he cited to S.E.C. v. Cross Financial Services, Inc. \"for the proposition that factual disputes regarding corporate structure or control are not appropriately resolved at the pleading stage.\" It is not clear to the Court how that case—which addressed subject-matter jurisdiction over a nominal defendant in the context of the federal securities laws—is relevant to the instant action.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "S.E.C. v. Cross Financial Services, Inc., 908 F. Supp. 718 (C.D. Cal. 1995).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "198 Cal.App.3d 1357, 1366 (1989)", "asserted_case_name": "Booth v. Allstate Ins. Co.", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Lacey v. State Farm General Insurance", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-06", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/311/Lacey_v._State_Farm_General_Insurances_Co._D._Cal._May_6_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "I was unable to locate this judicial decision online. I tried inputting the citation that Plaintiff provided. I also searched for it using the case caption in the brief. The decision does not appear to exist.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Booth v. Allstate Ins. Co., 198 Cal.App.3d 1357, 1366 (1989).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a case shares this name at a different citation, but this reporter is outside the set Cite11 has confirmed court-family coverage for -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "164 Cal.App.3d 476, 489 (1985)", "asserted_case_name": "National Steel Products Co. v. Superior Court", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Lacey v. State Farm General Insurance", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-06", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/311/Lacey_v._State_Farm_General_Insurances_Co._D._Cal._May_6_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "I reviewed the online version of the appellate decision in National Steel Products. The text quoted in Plaintiff's brief does not exist in that opinion.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "National Steel Products Co. v. Superior Court, 164 Cal.App.3d 476, 489 (1985).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "501 U.S. 32, 46-47 (1991)", "asserted_case_name": "Chambers v. NASCO, Inc.", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Lacey v. State Farm General Insurance", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-06", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/311/Lacey_v._State_Farm_General_Insurances_Co._D._Cal._May_6_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "Sanctions based on a federal court's inherent authority are \"both broader and narrower than other means of imposing sanctions\" because they encompass \"a full range of litigation abuses.\" Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 46-47 (1991).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 46-47 (1991).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "239 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir. 2001)", "asserted_case_name": "Fink v. Gomez", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Lacey v. State Farm General Insurance", "court": "C.D. California", "date": "2025-05-06", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/311/Lacey_v._State_Farm_General_Insurances_Co._D._Cal._May_6_2025.pdf" }, "quote": "The Ninth Circuit has concluded that such sanctions \"are available if the court specifically finds bad faith or conduct tantamount to bad faith\" by an attorney. Fink v. Gomez, 239 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir. 2001).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Fink v. Gomez, 239 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir. 2001).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "365 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)", "asserted_case_name": "Board of Regents v. Wilson", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Capital Standard's reply brief added another fifteen AI hallucinations, including the fake case Board of Regents v. Wilson, 365 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); citations to several of the offending cases from the amended initial brief for additional propositions that are nowhere to be found in them; and, for good measure, citations to several new cases with that same problem.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Board of Regents v. Wilson, 365 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Chambers v. Gaul", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Chambers v. Gaul", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Chambers v. Gaul, not Regents v. Wilson" }, { "citation": "441 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)", "asserted_case_name": "Maciejewski v. Holland", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Repeatedly citing Maciejewski v. Holland, 441 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), a two-page opinion explaining why the complaint there stated a cause of action for declaratory relief, for unrelated propositions such as that \"[u]nder Florida law, a party's actions that affirm the validity of a transaction preclude subsequent challenges to that transaction\"... In its answer brief, U.S. Bank pointed out that ... Maciejewski does not even mention the word \"ratification\" (let alone the concept).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Maciejewski v. Holland, 441 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "159 So. 2d 236, 239 (Fla. 1963)", "asserted_case_name": "Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Serving up nonexistent quotes—complete with purported pincites—such as, \"[fundamental error] goes to the foundation of the case or the merits of the cause of action and is equivalent to a denial of due process,\" citing Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack, 159 So. 2d 236, 239 (Fla. 1963).", "note": "Relabeled FAKE_QUOTE -> FAKE_WRONG_CASE on benchmark review (2026-09-06): the order's own framing (\"nonexistent quotes... complete with purported pincites\") describes the whole citation as invented, and Cite11 independently confirmed the address itself is a citation collision -- 159 So. 2d 236 is Duarte v. Stevens Markets, Inc., an unrelated 1963 Florida case -- not merely a real, correctly-cited case with a fabricated quote.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack, 159 So. 2d 236, 239 (Fla. 1963).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "citation_collision", "category": "mismatch", "verificationLabel": "This citation belongs to a different case: Reinaldo DUARTE v. STEVENS MARKETS, INC., Security Mutual Insurance Company of New York, and the Florida Industrial Commission", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "Reinaldo DUARTE v. STEVENS MARKETS, INC., Security Mutual Insurance Company of New York, and the Florida Industrial Commission", "reason": "this volume/reporter/page belongs to Reinaldo DUARTE v. STEVENS MARKETS, INC., Security Mutual Insurance Company of New York, and the Florida Industrial Commission, not Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack" }, { "citation": "641 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)", "asserted_case_name": "Miami Country Day School v. Bakst", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Passing off Miami Country Day School v. Bakst, 641 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), a case discussing the statutory mechanics of whether a houseboat qualified for a homestead exemption, as authority for a panoply of propositions, including that \"Florida law provides strong protections to individuals who acquire property in good faith, for valuable consideration, and without notice of competing claims\" and that \"a party's delay or misleading conduct bars recovery where another party suffers detriment as a result.\"", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Miami Country Day School v. Bakst, 641 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "95 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)", "asserted_case_name": "Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Relying on Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 95 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), a case pertaining to the adequacy of an undated assignment to confer standing, as an all-purpose authority on a multitude of other subjects... In its answer brief, U.S. Bank pointed out that Gonzalez says nothing whatsoever about a noteholder's rights.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 95 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "177 F.4th 1014, 1024 (9th Cir. 2026)", "asserted_case_name": "Malkeet Lnu v. Blanche", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association", "court": "Florida Court of Appeal (2d DCA)", "date": "2026-08-21", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2906/Capital_Standard_v._US_Bank_NA_USA_21_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "\"Two types of mistakes, or 'hallucinations,' are most relevant: fabrications and inaccuracies.\" Malkeet Lnu v. Blanche, 177 F.4th 1014, 1024 (9th Cir. 2026).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Malkeet Lnu v. Blanche, 177 F.4th 1014, 1024 (9th Cir. 2026).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "not_resolvable", "category": "not_found", "verificationLabel": "Not found in the public record Cite11 can check — treat as unverified and confirm in your primary source.", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "no source answers to the case name either -- F1 candidate" }, { "citation": "(Ninth Circuit case, full citation withheld by court)", "asserted_case_name": "Antonakeas", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services", "court": "D. Arizona", "date": "2026-08-24", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2942/Ruiz_v._Magellan_Financial_USA_24_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "On July 8, 2026, the Court issued an order to show cause (\"OSC\") requiring Plaintiff's counsel, Elizabeth Tate, to show cause why she should not be sanctioned or disciplined for including, in Plaintiff's response to Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees, two false quotations from Ninth Circuit cases... Ms. Tate mistakenly did not correct the misquotations from the Antonakeas or Osazuwa cases. She apologizes and accepts full responsibility for the quotation errors.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "(Ninth Circuit case, full citation withheld by court)", "asserted_case_name": "Osazuwa", "label": "FAKE_QUOTE", "source_order": { "case": "Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services", "court": "D. Arizona", "date": "2026-08-24", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2942/Ruiz_v._Magellan_Financial_USA_24_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "On July 8, 2026, the Court issued an order to show cause (\"OSC\") requiring Plaintiff's counsel, Elizabeth Tate, to show cause why she should not be sanctioned or disciplined for including, in Plaintiff's response to Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees, two false quotations from Ninth Circuit cases... Ms. Tate mistakenly did not correct the misquotations from the Antonakeas or Osazuwa cases. She apologizes and accepts full responsibility for the quotation errors.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "347 F.3d 515 (3d Cir. 2003)", "asserted_case_name": "Ansell v. Green Acres Contracting Co.", "label": "REAL", "source_order": { "case": "Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services", "court": "D. Arizona", "date": "2026-08-24", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2942/Ruiz_v._Magellan_Financial_USA_24_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Ms. Tate utilized ChatGPT to prepare the draft brief. ChatGPT cited the Ansell v. Green Acres Contracting Co., 347 F.3d 515 (3d Cir. 2003) case to support the proposition that evidence of favorable treatment of the plaintiff or others does not preclude discrimination and may be excluded as irrelevant or misleading.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ansell v. Green Acres Contracting Co., 347 F.3d 515 (3d Cir. 2003).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "611 F.3d 1027, 1038 (9th Cir. 2010)", "asserted_case_name": "In re Girardi", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services", "court": "D. Arizona", "date": "2026-08-24", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2942/Ruiz_v._Magellan_Financial_USA_24_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Admonition is generally appropriate when a lawyer engages in an isolated instance of neglect in determining whether submitted statements or documents are false or in failing to disclose material information upon learning of its falsity, and causes little or no actual or potential injury to a party, or causes little or no adverse or potentially adverse effect on the legal proceeding. In re Girardi, 611 F.3d 1027, 1038 (9th Cir. 2010).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "In re Girardi, 611 F.3d 1027, 1038 (9th Cir. 2010).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": "In re Thomas V. GIRARDI, Esq. Walter J. Lack, Esq. Paul A. Traina, Esq., Sonia Eduarda Franco Franco v. Dow Chemical Company", "reason": "the citation resolves and its own case name (In re Thomas V. GIRARDI, Esq. Walter J. Lack, Esq. Paul A. Traina, Esq., Sonia Eduarda Franco Franco v. Dow Chemical Company) contains In re Girardi's party name -- verified without a full 'v.' comparison" }, { "citation": "No. 21-cv-01386, 2023 WL 8872476, at *6 (D. Colo. Dec. 22, 2023)", "asserted_case_name": "Ricks v. Starbucks", "label": "FAKE_WRONG_CASE", "source_order": { "case": "Adams v. Matrix Providers Inc. et al.", "court": "D. Colorado", "date": "2026-08-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2991/Adams_v._Matrix_Providers_Inc._et_al_USA_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "In the response, Ms. Pearson provided an explanation regarding the citation to a nonexistent case in her briefing, see ECF No. 88 at 18 (citing Ricks v. Starbucks, No. 21-cv-01386, 2023 WL 8872476, at *6 (D. Colo. Dec. 22, 2023))... In her response to the show cause order, Ms. Pearson represents that the nonexistent case, Ricks v. Starbucks, was included in Plaintiff's briefing inadvertently... she further explained that while the case and quoted language exist, they are not part of the same case, and the incorrect case citation was included inadvertently.", "note": "Court’s shorthand calls this \"the nonexistent case,\" but its own text confirms the case and quoted language both genuinely exist, attached to the wrong citation -- FAKE_WRONG_CASE per the full record, not FAKE_NONEXISTENT.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Ricks v. Starbucks, No. 21-cv-01386, 2023 WL 8872476, at *6 (D. Colo. Dec. 22, 2023).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "outside_coverage", "category": "outside_coverage", "verificationLabel": "No source answers to this citation, and it falls outside the court/reporter coverage Cite11 has confirmed — not enough to call this fabricated", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": "a Westlaw/LEXIS proprietary citation number, not a court reporter CourtListener can authoritatively resolve or rule out -- not enough to call this fabricated" }, { "citation": "880 F.3d 544, 549 (10th Cir. 2018)", "asserted_case_name": "Tabura v. Kellogg USA", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Adams v. Matrix Providers Inc. et al.", "court": "D. Colorado", "date": "2026-08-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2991/Adams_v._Matrix_Providers_Inc._et_al_USA_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "application of a \"burden-shifting analysis.\" Tabura v. Kellogg USA, 880 F.3d 544, 549 (10th Cir. 2018) (citing Thomas v. Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers, 225 F.3d 1149, 1155–56).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Tabura v. Kellogg USA, 880 F.3d 544, 549 (10th Cir. 2018).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000)", "asserted_case_name": "Servants of the Paraclete v. Does", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Adams v. Matrix Providers Inc. et al.", "court": "D. Colorado", "date": "2026-08-27", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2991/Adams_v._Matrix_Providers_Inc._et_al_USA_August_2026.pdf" }, "quote": "Relief under Rule 59(e) is appropriate when \"the court has misapprehended the facts, a party's position, or the controlling law.\" Servants of the Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000). A Rule 59(e) motion should not \"revisit issues already addressed or advance arguments that could have been raised in prior briefing.\" Id. (citing Van Skiver, 952 F.2d at 1243).", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Servants of the Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "Abadie v. District of Columbia", "asserted_case_name": "Abadie v. District of Columbia", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "Ms. Hall confirmed that four of the brief's cited authorities did not exist. She acknowledged that these citations were \"not legitimate legal authority\" ... The fake case names were Abadie v. District of Columbia, Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank, Osborne v. District of Columbia, and Woods v. United States. To avoid memorializing the erroneous citations, we have chosen not to set forth the full (fake) citations here.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank", "asserted_case_name": "Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "Ms. Hall confirmed that four of the brief's cited authorities did not exist. She acknowledged that these citations were \"not legitimate legal authority\" ... The fake case names were Abadie v. District of Columbia, Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank, Osborne v. District of Columbia, and Woods v. United States. To avoid memorializing the erroneous citations, we have chosen not to set forth the full (fake) citations here.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "Osborne v. District of Columbia", "asserted_case_name": "Osborne v. District of Columbia", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "Ms. Hall confirmed that four of the brief's cited authorities did not exist. She acknowledged that these citations were \"not legitimate legal authority\" ... The fake case names were Abadie v. District of Columbia, Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank, Osborne v. District of Columbia, and Woods v. United States. To avoid memorializing the erroneous citations, we have chosen not to set forth the full (fake) citations here.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "Woods v. United States", "asserted_case_name": "Woods v. United States", "label": "FAKE_NONEXISTENT", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "Ms. Hall confirmed that four of the brief's cited authorities did not exist. She acknowledged that these citations were \"not legitimate legal authority\" ... The fake case names were Abadie v. District of Columbia, Cason v. Nat'l Consumer Co-op Bank, Osborne v. District of Columbia, and Woods v. United States. To avoid memorializing the erroneous citations, we have chosen not to set forth the full (fake) citations here.", "outcome": "NOT_TESTABLE", "reasonSkipped": "no reporter citation in the source record (court withheld it)" }, { "citation": "96 F.4th 1255, 1256-57 (9th Cir. 2024)", "asserted_case_name": "Grant v. City of Long Beach", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "Accord Grant v. City of Long Beach, 96 F.4th 1255, 1256-57 (9th Cir. 2024) (striking brief and dismissing appeal for noncompliance with the \"mandatory components of a brief on appeal\" set forth in Fed. R. App. P. 28 because the brief was \"replete with misrepresentations and fabricated case law\").", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "Grant v. City of Long Beach, 96 F.4th 1255, 1256-57 (9th Cir. 2024).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null }, { "citation": "744 F.3d 1362, 1370 n.2 (D.C. Cir. 2014)", "asserted_case_name": "United States v. Jones", "label": "REAL_FROM_ORDER", "source_order": { "case": "Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company", "court": "D.C. Court of Appeals", "date": "2026-09-03", "url": "https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3019/Douglas_v._Deutsche_Bank_Natl_Trt_Co._24-CV-1099_ORDER.pdf" }, "quote": "United States v. Jones, 744 F.3d 1362, 1370 n.2 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (declining to consider a \"bare-bones argument[ ] unsupported by any citations to legal authority\" under Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A)). A hallucinated citation is, at best, no citation at all; indeed, it is worse.", "outcome": "CLASSIFIED", "syntheticText": "United States v. Jones, 744 F.3d 1362, 1370 n.2 (D.C. Cir. 2014).", "extractedCount": 1, "classification": "resolved_clean", "category": "verified", "verificationLabel": "Verified", "correctionCitation": null, "actualCase": null, "reason": null } ]