Anna Sheerer v. Thomas Panas
CA California (d1) · Mar 19, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA California (d1)
- Record ID
- anna-sheerer-v-thomas-panas-2026-03-19
- Observed outcome
- The court issued a published warning to the respondent and all in propria persona litigants regarding the duty to verify citations, while declining to impose monetary sanctions.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to the respondent regarding the submission of AI-generated fabrications. Although the court held that the respondent's conduct merited striking the brief and potential sanctions, it declined to impose monetary penalties, opting instead to issue a published warning to all in propria persona litigants regarding the duty to verify all citations.
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Respondent cited a non-existent case as authority; court identified the citation as fabricated..
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated: Case Law
- False Quotes: Case Law
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a trial court order modifying child support, during which the court addressed the respondent's submission of a brief containing AI-generated fabrications.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The respondent admitted to using an unidentified generative AI tool.
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).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
- Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
- Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.