HomeCasesBrigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089)

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 75/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.

Corpus matter record

Brigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089)

· Feb 24, 2026

/ state Editorial impact: low fake citations contract trial None Adjudicated

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's withdrawn motion papers relied on non-existent or inapplicable legal authority generated through AI use; the arbitrator noted the issue but did not identify the individual citations or analyze them separately. Outcome: Motion withdrawn sua sponte.

Why the court cared: The structured public record identifies fake citations and contract and records Motion withdrawn sua sponte. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now: This matter connects fake citations and contract with Motion withdrawn sua sponte in the recorded tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and contract with Motion withdrawn sua sponte in the recorded tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

Court

Jurisdictionstate

CircuitNot recorded

DateFeb 24, 2026

AI toolUnidentified

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeMotion withdrawn sua sponte

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

Procedural posture

Motion withdrawn sua sponte

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Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's withdrawn motion papers relied on non-existent or inapplicable legal authority generated through AI use; the arbitrator noted the issue but did not identify the individual citations or analyze them separately.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Brigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089)?: Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's withdrawn motion papers relied on non-existent or inapplicable legal authority generated through AI use; the arbitrator noted the issue but did not identify the individual citations or analyze them separately. Outcome: Motion withdrawn sua sponte.
Why does Brigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089) matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects fake citations and contract with Motion withdrawn sua sponte in the recorded tribunal. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Brigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089)?: 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 Brigade Talent LLC v. Erin Dana Lichy (JAMS Arbitration No. 5425003089) 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.

Apelação Cível nº 1032884-04.2025.8.26.0224TJ San Paulo · Aug 13, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified Bailey v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc.W.D. Tennessee · Jun 8, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified Mary McGreevy v. Adam WitkinSC Oregon · Jun 4, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified Strategic Funding Source, Inc. v. STI-NY, LLCSC New York · May 28, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified Williamson v. Meyers (derivatively on behalf of Equinix, Inc.)D. Delaware · May 27, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified Joshua Harris v. Pinnacle Bank (2)N.D. Mississippi · May 7, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: Unidentified

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open recorded source Suggest a correction to this record

Public-record statuspublic record, not an allegation-only entry

Indexing eligibilitypublicly indexable with evidence status disclosed

Published and maintained byManu Ayala · AI VortexIndependent legal AI risk intelligence

Corpus snapshot checked Oct 9, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Oct 9, 2026; latest tracked decision Oct 8, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Explore jurisdiction

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