AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Oct 27, 2026 · Latest decision Oct 23, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesCase I SA/Kr 31/26
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 50/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Case I SA/Kr 31/26

Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0), which credits Paweł Kowalski. What AI Vortex adds.

WSA w Krakowie · Feb 23, 2026

PolandEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authoritytrialNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated judgments. The matter is recorded in WSA w Krakowie on 2026-02-23 and concerns pro se and fake citations. The tracked outcome is the procedural response described in the linked source; consult the linked source for the complete record.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records a recorded judicial or procedural response. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated judgments. The matter is recorded in WSA w Krakowie on 2026-02-23 and concerns pro se and fake citations. The tracked outcome is the procedural response described in the linked source; consult the linked source for the complete record.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtWSA w Krakowie
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateFeb 23, 2026
NO
AI toolNo tool named in source
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
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

Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.

Correction behavior

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.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated judgments
  2. Fabricated: Case Law
  3. Misrepresented: Case Law

Questions this record answers

What happened in Case I SA/Kr 31/26?
Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated judgments. The matter is recorded in WSA w Krakowie on 2026-02-23 and concerns pro se and fake citations. The tracked outcome is the procedural response described in the linked source; consult the linked source for the complete record.
Why does Case I SA/Kr 31/26 matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Case I SA/Kr 31/26?
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. No underlying public source link is currently recorded. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Which source supports this Case I SA/Kr 31/26 summary?
The recorded source is Paweł Kowalski. It is classified as source link missing; 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.

III SA/Kr 488/26WSA w Krakowie · Jul 23, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsM.W. v. Director of the National Tax InformationWSA w Krakowie · Jun 19, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsMoore v. Jackson Walker LLP, et al.S.D. Texas · Oct 21, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceSabatini v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionC. Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceIn the Matter of Gary Brown, Jr.AC Maryland · Oct 8, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceButler v. The Travelers Indemnity CompanySC Connecticut · Oct 7, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in source

This record involves a self-represented party. See all pro se litigant AI hallucination decisions in the corpus, with counts by year, country and 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.