Crowder v. Yussman
CA Kentucky · Oct 24, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Kentucky
- Record ID
- crowder-v-yussman-2025-10-24
- Observed outcome
- The court struck the offending portions of the appellant's brief and issued a formal warning to counsel regarding citation verification.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Kentucky Court of Appeals issued a formal warning to counsel for submitting a brief containing three fabricated case citations. The court struck the offending portions of the brief, characterizing the failure to verify substantive legal authority as a violation of both the Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure and the attorney's ethical obligations.
The court reasoned that the submission of invented law violates RAP 31(E)(1) and 32(A)(4) and ethical duties under SCR 3.130(1.1). It determined that while inadvertent errors are excusable, the failure to confirm the existence of cited cases is an affront to the court and the profession, justifying the striking of the brief's offending sections and a formal warning.
Placeholder citations left unreplaced become fabrications; enforce a no-placeholder rule with cite-checking as the last pre-filing step.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Legal Authority
- Failure To Verify Citations
- Use Of Unreplaced Placeholder Text
- Fake Citations
- Tort
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the appellee, affirmed by the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court identifies the citations as 'placeholder citations' created by counsel and staff.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Implement a mandatory final review step to verify the existence and accuracy of every case citation before filing.
- Prohibit the use of placeholder citations in draft documents to prevent accidental inclusion in final filings.
- Ensure that all AI-generated research is independently verified against primary legal databases.