Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Butler v. The Travelers Indemnity Company
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
SC Connecticut · Oct 7, 2026
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited State v. Gonzalez at 347 Conn. 770, 786–87 (2023), but no such case exists at that citation; Tilsen v. Benson appears there and does not concern the stated proposition. Outcome: Filings struck.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Filings struck. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Filings struck in SC Connecticut. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited State v. Gonzalez at 347 Conn. 770, 786–87 (2023), but no such case exists at that citation; Tilsen v. Benson appears there and does not concern the stated proposition. Outcome: Filings struck.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Filings struck in SC Connecticut. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
ConnecticutSingle-state evidence scope
CourtSC Connecticut
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit2nd Circuit
DateOct 7, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeFilings struck
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
Filings struck
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
22 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited State v. Gonzalez at 347 Conn. 770, 786–87 (2023), but no such case exists at that citation; Tilsen v. Benson appears there and does not concern the stated proposition.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited Vanderbilt v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. at 342 Conn. 215, 231 (2022), but no such case exists at that citation; State v. Bruny appears there and is unrelated to the proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a general standing principle to Financial Consulting, but the court held that the case does not stand for that proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff cited Ajadi for a rule requiring dismissal or vacatur whenever justiciability prerequisites are absent; the pinpoint passage did not address that issue and the court found the claimed holding inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff characterized Polymer Resources as binding precedent concerning protective orders, nonparties, and caption corrections; the case addressed intervention in a specific environmental and administrative context and did not establish those rules.
- False Quotes: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed quoted language about strict conformity of later filings to Mulligan; the case contains neither the quoted language nor the asserted holding.
- False Quotes: Case Law | The plaintiff quoted language from Cologne that does not appear in the cited case.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff stated that Papa held that a court's authority to enforce its orders is an inherent power absolutely necessary to preserve dignity and fair administration; the court found that this was not Papa's holding.
Show 14 additional discrepancies
- False Quotes: Case Law | The plaintiff quoted language from Blumberg Associates Worldwide that does not appear in the cited case.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited Gagne v. Vaccaro at 311 Conn. 430, 448–49 (2012), but no such case exists at that citation; Statewide Grievance Committee v. Ganim appears there and is unrelated to the proposition.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited Rinfret v. Porter at 314 Conn. 38, 48–49 (2014), but no such case exists at that citation; State v. Ciullo appears there and is unrelated to the proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed an expansive deterrence rule concerning willful noncompliance and re-filing to National Hockey League; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed an absolute-finality and anti-curing rule to Lafayette; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a strict preclusion and no-do-over rule to Federated Department Stores; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a rule barring cure or re-filing after willful litigation failure to Gionfriddo; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a broad collateral-bar rule concerning challenges to standing orders to State v. Wright; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed an exclusive appellate-review rule and collateral-bar doctrine to Walker; the court found the statement was not the holding and was inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a broad collateral-bar and exclusive-direct-review rule to State v. Winter; the court found the statement inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff attributed a permanent loss of procedural remedies or re-filing rights to Maness; the court found the statement inaccurate.
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited State v. Mattioli at 341 Conn. 660, 674 (2021), but no such case exists at that citation; Gonzalez v. O & G Industries, Inc. appears at 341 Conn. 660 and is unrelated to the proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff stated that Batte-Holmgren imposed an absolute responsibility on sophisticated litigants to conform filings to procedural mandates; the court found that characterization inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | The plaintiff stated that AvalonBay established inherent authority to issue conditional orders or sanctions to compel absolute compliance; the court found that characterization inaccurate.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Butler v. The Travelers Indemnity Company?
- Fabricated: Case Law | The plaintiff cited State v. Gonzalez at 347 Conn. 770, 786–87 (2023), but no such case exists at that citation; Tilsen v. Benson appears there and does not concern the stated proposition. Outcome: Filings struck.
- Why does Butler v. The Travelers Indemnity Company matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Filings struck in SC Connecticut. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Butler v. The Travelers Indemnity Company?
- 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 Butler v. The Travelers Indemnity Company 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.
Weekly alert
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.