Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0PDE36RGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Andre Lamont Goddard, Jr. v. City University of Seattle

D. DC · Mar 6, 2026

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
D. DC
Record ID
andre-lamont-goddard-jr-v-city-university-of-seattle-2026-03-06
Observed outcome
The court granted the defendant's partial motion to dismiss in part, denied it in part, and issued an admonition to the plaintiff regarding the use of AI-generated fabricated citations.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court issued an admonition to the pro se plaintiff regarding the inclusion of fabricated case citations in their filings. The court identified these citations as likely generated by artificial intelligence and reminded the plaintiff of their affirmative duty under Rule 11 to verify the existence and accuracy of all legal authorities presented to the court.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Court could not locate the cited decision and found it likely fabricated; citation does not support plaintiff's proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court could not locate the cited case and found it likely fabricated; citation does not support plaintiff's proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court could not locate the cited case and found it likely fabricated; citation does not support plaintiff's proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court could not locate the cited case and found it likely fabricated; citation does not support plaintiff's proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court could not locate the cited case and found it likely fabricated; citation does not support plaintiff's proposition.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. DC, with the listed outcome: Admonishment.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Civil Rights
  • Trial
  • Warning
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Memorandum Opinion and Order resolving Defendant's partial motion to dismiss.
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

The court noted the citations bore the stamp of being invented by artificial intelligence.

Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.

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

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.