Apelação Cível nº 1.0000.25.331707-7/001 (Silvio Xavier dos Santos v. Estado de Minas Gerais)
TJMG · Nov 27, 2025
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent. Outcome: Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet.. The appellant submitted several jurisprudential citations that, upon the court's independent search of STJ and TJMG portals, were found not to exist. The appellant acknowledged the authorities were drawn from AI-assisted research platforms but did not identify the specific tool. The court held that use of AI is permitted but does not relieve lawyers of the duty to verify sources; it found the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence serious, ordered the court registry to notify OAB/MG to investigate disciplinary responsibility under art. 77, §6º CPC/2015, and warned of possible sanctions. No disciplinary sanction was imposed in the decision itself.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies fake citations and trial and records Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and trial with Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet. in TJMG. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent. Outcome: Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet.. The appellant submitted several jurisprudential citations that, upon the court's independent search of STJ and TJMG portals, were found not to exist. The appellant acknowledged the authorities were drawn from AI-assisted research platforms but did not identify the specific tool. The court held that use of AI is permitted but does not relieve lawyers of the duty to verify sources; it found the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence serious, ordered the court registry to notify OAB/MG to investigate disciplinary responsibility under art. 77, §6º CPC/2015, and warned of possible sanctions. No disciplinary sanction was imposed in the decision itself.
This matter connects fake citations and trial with Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet. in TJMG. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Apelação Cível nº 1.0000.25.331707-7/001 (Silvio Xavier dos Santos v. Estado de Minas Gerais)?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Citation presented in the appeal that the court could not locate in STJ/TJMG databases; court found it nonexistent. Outcome: Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet.. The appellant submitted several jurisprudential citations that, upon the court's independent search of STJ and TJMG portals, were found not to exist. The appellant acknowledged the authorities were drawn from AI-assisted research platforms but did not identify the specific tool. The court held that use of AI is permitted but does not relieve lawyers of the duty to verify sources; it found the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence serious, ordered the court registry to notify OAB/MG to investigate disciplinary responsibility under art. 77, §6º CPC/2015, and warned of possible sanctions. No disciplinary sanction was imposed in the decision itself.
- Why does Apelação Cível nº 1.0000.25.331707-7/001 (Silvio Xavier dos Santos v. Estado de Minas Gerais) matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and trial with Court ordered notification to OAB/MG for apuração de responsabilidade disciplinar related to the presentation of nonexistent jurisprudence; no professional sanction yet. in TJMG. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Apelação Cível nº 1.0000.25.331707-7/001 (Silvio Xavier dos Santos v. Estado de Minas Gerais)?
- 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 Apelação Cível nº 1.0000.25.331707-7/001 (Silvio Xavier dos Santos v. Estado de Minas Gerais) 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.