HomeCasesArthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group

CA Washington · Apr 20, 2026

WA / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesadministrative

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor. Outcome: Admonishment.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Admonishment; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Washington, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor. Outcome: Admonishment.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Washington, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

WashingtonSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCA Washington

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit9th Circuit

DateApr 20, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeAdmonishment

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

Admonishment

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor.
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included invented or 'hallucinated' citations in his briefing; court noted these citations were fabricated or generated by AI or other sources.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?: False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor. Outcome: Admonishment.
Why does Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Admonishment in CA Washington, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?: 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 Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group 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.

Matthew Merz v. Harlyn Jenkins, Jillane Baros, Melinda Finn‑KamerathCA Washington · Jun 15, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations In re the Marriage of YoungCA Washington · Jul 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations In the Matter of the Estate of CAROL M. CAREYCA Washington · Mar 3, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Put A Bird On It, LLC v. Seattle Arena Holdings, LLCCA Washington · Mar 2, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Gregory Richmond and Lynne Richmond v. City of Newport, WashingtonCA Washington (d3) · Mar 17, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citations Esterra Commons Venture, LLC dba Verde Esterra Park v. Justin NortonCA Washington (d1) · Mar 16, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor. Outcome: Admonishment.

Operational lesson

Record details

WashingtonSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCA Washington

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit9th Circuit

DateApr 20, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeAdmonishment

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor.

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant included invented or 'hallucinated' citations in his briefing; court noted these citations were fabricated or generated by AI or other sources.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?

False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant provided fictitious quotations purportedly from existing cases; court found these quotations to be invented and rebuked the lack of candor. Outcome: Admonishment.

Why does Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group?

Which source supports this Arthur West v. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group 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.