HomeCasesDavid R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 86/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al.

E.D. Texas · Jun 15, 2026

TX / federalEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationscivil rightstrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Maddox v. Saita,' which does not exist; the court confirmed at the hearing that this citation was hallucinated by AI. Outcome: Monetary Sanctions. Order and Recommendations are here.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Monetary Sanctions; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Cetient with Monetary Sanctions in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Cetient with Monetary Sanctions in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

TexasSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtE.D. Texas

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit5th Circuit

DateJun 15, 2026

AI toolCetient

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeMonetary Sanctions

Known amount$200

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

Cetient is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Monetary Sanctions

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Maddox v. Saita,' which does not exist; the court confirmed at the hearing that this citation was hallucinated by AI.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited at least five other cases in filings that the court could not locate and concluded were likely AI-created hallucinations.

Questions this record answers

What happened in David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al.?: Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Maddox v. Saita,' which does not exist; the court confirmed at the hearing that this citation was hallucinated by AI. Outcome: Monetary Sanctions. Order and Recommendations are here.
Why does David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al. matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Cetient with Monetary Sanctions in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, 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 David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, 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.

Fabian Antonio Thomas v. Officer Skylar Sillivent, et al.E.D. Texas · Mar 2, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Boggess v. ChamnessE.D. Texas · Apr 1, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations John Hurt v. Ampcus, Inc.E.D. Texas · Jul 8, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Wells Fargo Bank v. Frances W. DeanE.D. Texas · Feb 24, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Shaerica L. Walder v. Experian Information SolutionsE.D. Texas · Feb 18, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Moorehead v. Goodwill Industries of Northeast TexasE.D. Texas · Nov 18, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Cetient with Monetary Sanctions in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Maddox v. Saita,' which does not exist; the court confirmed at the hearing that this citation was hallucinated by AI.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited at least five other cases in filings that the court could not locate and concluded were likely AI-created hallucinations.

Questions this record answers

What happened in David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al.?

Why does David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al. matter for legal AI risk?

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Cetient with Monetary Sanctions in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

What does the public record establish about David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, et al.?

Which source supports this David R. Pete v. Greg Abbott, 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.