AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 15, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 11, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesCompania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al.
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

Compania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al.

S.D. Texas · Jun 23, 2026

TX / federalEditorial impact: lowfake citationstorttrialOrdered To Explain
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Court ordered Defendant Union Pacific to produce a copy of a cited case that the Court could not locate and to disclose the research tools, specifically including any AI tools, used to identify the authority.

Why the court cared
The Court determined it could not locate the cited case in Westlaw, LexisNexis, or the South Western Reporter, leading to the conclusion that the case likely does not exist.
Why it matters now
This case illustrates judicial scrutiny of potentially hallucinated citations in federal filings. It highlights the risk of relying on unverified AI-generated research and the court's authority to demand transparency regarding research tools used by counsel.

Why this matter is tracked

In a negligence action involving a train-truck collision, Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company moved to dismiss, citing 'Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Shiflet, 425 S.W.2d 662 (Tex. 1968)' to support a legal proposition regarding motorist behavior. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas denied the motion to dismiss, finding the complaint sufficiently pleaded negligence. Regarding the citation, the Court stated it could not locate the referenced case in legal databases or reporters and expressed belief that the case does not exist. Consequently, the Court ordered the Defendant to produce the cited opinion and explain the research tools, including any AI tools, used to locate it.

Operational lesson

This case illustrates judicial scrutiny of potentially hallucinated citations in federal filings. It highlights the risk of relying on unverified AI-generated research and the court's authority to demand transparency regarding research tools used by counsel.

Record details

TexasSingle-state evidence scope
Explore TXOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtS.D. Texas
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit5th Circuit
DateJun 23, 2026
UN
AI toolunspecified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeThe Court denied the motion to dismiss and issued an order to show cause requiring the defendant to produce the cited case and explain its research methodology.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

Court ordered disclosure of research tools if AI was used.

Procedural posture

Order denying motion to dismiss and order to show cause issued by the U.S. District Court for the S.D. Texas.

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.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Union Pacific cited 'Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Shiflet, 425 S.W.2d 662 (Tex. 1968)' for the proposition that railroads may presume motorists obey traffic laws; the Court could not locate the opinion and believes the case does not exist.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Compania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al.?
The Court ordered Defendant Union Pacific to produce a copy of a cited case that the Court could not locate and to disclose the research tools, specifically including any AI tools, used to identify the authority.
Why does Compania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al. matter for legal AI risk?
This case illustrates judicial scrutiny of potentially hallucinated citations in federal filings. It highlights the risk of relying on unverified AI-generated research and the court's authority to demand transparency regarding research tools used by counsel.
What does the public record establish about Compania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al.?
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 Compania General de Combustibles S.A., et al. v. RGR Global Logistics, LLC, et al. 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.

Cristancho et al. v. SWBC Mortgage Corporation et al.S.D. Texas · Aug 4, 2026same court · fake citations + trialMoore v. Wireless CCTV LLCS.D. Texas · Apr 27, 2026same court · fake citations + trialKenneth Hawkins v. I.C. System, Inc.S.D. Texas · Feb 23, 2026same court · fake citations + trialVirginia Montoya Cabanas v. Pamela Bondi, et al.S.D. Texas · Nov 13, 2025same court · fake citations + trialSusan Elizabeth Duve v. William Charles Forrest, et al.S.D. Texas · Jun 30, 2026same court · fake citations + trialKisha Peters v. Banner HealthS.D. Texas · Jan 15, 2026same court · fake citations + trial