Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0FWVTPGGenerated September 10, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

A.T.W. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

CA Kentucky · May 22, 2026

Jurisdiction
state
Court
CA Kentucky
Record ID
a-t-w-v-commonwealth-of-kentucky-2026-05-22
Observed outcome
The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's order denying the appellant's motions for relief from judgment.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of a pro se litigant's motion for relief from judgment after the trial court identified that the litigant had cited non-existent case law and fabricated quotations in her filings, raising significant concerns regarding her candor and credibility before the court.

Why the decision-maker cared

The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Appellant cited non-existent case law (court described some cited authorities as 'non-existent')..

Why it matters now

The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fabricated_case_law
  • Fabricated_quotes
  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Fabricated Quotes
  • Family
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Fayette Circuit Court's denial of CR 60.02 motions; the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
  2. Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
  3. Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.