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 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Angelica E. Cruz et al. v. United States of America
C.D. California · Dec 16, 2025
CA / federalEditorial impact: mediumfake citationstorttrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' opposition cited 'Kennedy v. United States, 2022 WL 17684317, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2022)'; Defendant and the Court were unable to locate any such case; counsel admitted not checking citations and attributed it to outside counsel; Court ordered show cause under Rule 11. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' opposition cited 'Kennedy v. United States, 2022 WL 17684317, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2022)'; Defendant and the Court were unable to locate any such case; counsel admitted not checking citations and attributed it to outside counsel; Court ordered show cause under Rule 11.
- Why it matters now
- Outsourcing a brief doesn't outsource Rule 11 — you own every citation outside counsel submits under your name.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' opposition cited 'Kennedy v. United States, 2022 WL 17684317, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2022)'; Defendant and the Court were unable to locate any such case; counsel admitted not checking citations and attributed it to outside counsel; Court ordered show cause under Rule 11. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
Operational lesson
Outsourcing a brief doesn't outsource Rule 11 — you own every citation outside counsel submits under your name.
Record details
CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtC.D. California
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateDec 16, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeOrder to Show Cause
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
Order to Show Cause
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' opposition cited 'Kennedy v. United States, 2022 WL 17684317, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2022)'; Defendant and the Court were unable to locate any such case; counsel admitted not checking citations and attributed it to outside counsel; Court ordered show cause under Rule 11.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Angelica E. Cruz et al. v. United States of America?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs' opposition cited 'Kennedy v. United States, 2022 WL 17684317, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2022)'; Defendant and the Court were unable to locate any such case; counsel admitted not checking citations and attributed it to outside counsel; Court ordered show cause under Rule 11. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
- Why does Angelica E. Cruz et al. v. United States of America matter for legal AI risk?
- Outsourcing a brief doesn't outsource Rule 11 — you own every citation outside counsel submits under your name.
- What does the public record establish about Angelica E. Cruz et al. v. United States of America?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Angelica E. Cruz et al. v. United States of America 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.