Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-05C6VDAGenerated August 16, 2026Evidence checked Aug 16, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Arbuckle v. Tanner, 2026 NSCA 62

N.S. C.A. · Aug 12, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
N.S. C.A.
Record ID
arbuckle-v-tanner-2026-nsca-62-2026-08-12
Observed outcome
Adverse Costs Order
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | AI appended a certified court transcriber certification page (name, NS registration number and signature of Sue Loney) to the September and October 2025 transcripts that were not certified. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order. The self-represented appellant admitted using unspecified AI tools to transcribe and assemble his appeal book. The AI-generated transcripts included material inaccuracies and, according to the appellant, appended a certified court-transcriber certificate (including name, registration number and signature) belonging to Sue Loney. The respondent discovered 39 discrepancies and the transcriber denied certifying those transcripts. The Court found the appellant knowingly filed misleading certifications and uncertified transcripts, rejected reliance on an AI excuse, dismissed the appeal for failure to perfect, and awarded indemnity costs of $20,000.

Why the decision-maker cared

The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Adverse Costs Order. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.

Why it matters now

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in N.S. C.A.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Family
  • Trial
  • Monetary
AI attribution
Not Established
Recorded tool
Unidentified
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Adverse Costs Order
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 current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

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.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.