Corey v. Kenneh
SC North Dakota · Oct 22, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The North Dakota Supreme Court identified that the appellee relied on non-existent or irrelevant case law to argue mootness. The Court did not impose a sanction for these citations, but instead proceeded to affirm the lower court's order based on the appellant's failure to provide a transcript necessary for meaningful appellate review.
- Why the court cared
- The Court reasoned that because the appellee provided non-existent case law, it could not discern whether collateral consequences existed to support a mootness argument, and it ultimately affirmed the lower court's order due to the appellant's failure to provide a transcript.
- Why it matters now
- This case illustrates how courts address non-existent citations in pro se filings. While the court identified the error, the outcome was determined by procedural failures regarding the appellate record rather than sanctions for the citations.
Why this matter is tracked
In an appeal regarding a disorderly conduct restraining order, the North Dakota Supreme Court addressed the appellee's argument that the appeal was moot. The Court noted that the case citations provided by the appellee in her brief to support the mootness argument were either non-existent or led to irrelevant cases. Consequently, the Court was unable to determine if collateral consequences existed to support a mootness finding. The Court ultimately affirmed the district court's order on the merits, citing the appellant's failure to provide a transcript for review. While the appellee's reliance on fabricated citations was noted by the Court, the decision turned on the appellant's failure to provide a record for appellate review.
This case illustrates how courts address non-existent citations in pro se filings. While the court identified the error, the outcome was determined by procedural failures regarding the appellate record rather than sanctions for the citations.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County to the Supreme Court of North Dakota.
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 | Corey's brief cited case law that the Court found led to different or no cases; Court concluded the citations were non-existent and could not support dismissal for mootness.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Corey v. Kenneh?
- The North Dakota Supreme Court identified that the appellee relied on non-existent or irrelevant case law to argue mootness. The Court did not impose a sanction for these citations, but instead proceeded to affirm the lower court's order based on the appellant's failure to provide a transcript necessary for meaningful appellate review.
- Why does Corey v. Kenneh matter for legal AI risk?
- This case illustrates how courts address non-existent citations in pro se filings. While the court identified the error, the outcome was determined by procedural failures regarding the appellate record rather than sanctions for the citations.
- What does the public record establish about Corey v. Kenneh?
- 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 Corey v. Kenneh 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.