Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
A.K. v. M.R.
CA Indiana · Mar 10, 2026
IN / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authorityother
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included reporter citation '994 N.E.2d 228' that did not correspond to the case name cited; court noted links pointed to unrelated Illinois decision rather than the Indiana case appellant referenced. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Admonishment; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Indiana, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included reporter citation '994 N.E.2d 228' that did not correspond to the case name cited; court noted links pointed to unrelated Illinois decision rather than the Indiana case appellant referenced. Outcome: Admonishment.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Indiana, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
IndianaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtCA Indiana
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit7th Circuit
DateMar 10, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeAdmonishment
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
reported
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Procedural posture
Admonishment
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included reporter citation '994 N.E.2d 228' that did not correspond to the case name cited; court noted links pointed to unrelated Illinois decision rather than the Indiana case appellant referenced.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited '106 N.E.3d 400' which the court found did not match the case name in the brief and linked to an unrelated Illinois decision instead of the Indiana authority claimed.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited '212 N.E.3d 768' that the court observed linked to a Massachusetts decision rather than the Indiana case the brief purported to cite.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant relied on Costello v. Zollman for a proposition about signage constituting harassment; court found Costello does not address signage and appellant misrepresented the authority.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in A.K. v. M.R.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included reporter citation '994 N.E.2d 228' that did not correspond to the case name cited; court noted links pointed to unrelated Illinois decision rather than the Indiana case appellant referenced. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why does A.K. v. M.R. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Indiana, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about A.K. v. M.R.?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this A.K. v. M.R. summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.