Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-14NWG0YGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

De Ford, Bader, and Key v. James Koutoulas and LGBCoin, LTD

M.D. Florida · Dec 2, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
M.D. Florida
Record ID
de-ford-bader-and-key-v-james-koutoulas-and-lgbcoin-ltd-2025-12-02
Observed outcome
The Court issued a formal warning to the Defendants regarding the use of non-existent case law.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The Court issued a formal warning to Defendants for citing fabricated case law in their summary judgment motion. The Court explicitly identified these citations as likely AI-generated hallucinations, noted the Defendants' failure to address the allegations, and cautioned that such conduct is sanctionable under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Defendants cited this opinion to support their 'meme coin' argument; the Court could not locate the decision and found the citation likely fabricated, warning that citing non-existent cases is sanctionable. || Fabricated: Case Law | Defendants relied on this purported S.D.N.Y. decision; the Court's independent research could not find the opinion and concluded the citation appears fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs also identified this cited decision as non-existent; the Court noted the additional alleged hallucinated citation and admonished defendants for failing to dispute the allegation.

Why it matters now

Failing to dispute fabricated-citation allegations compounds sanctions risk; respond and concede verification failures immediately.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Contract
  • Trial
  • Warning
AI attribution
Explicitly Recorded
Recorded tool
AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
The Court addressed the issue within an Order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, following Defendants' filing of an Amended Motion for Summary Judgment.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The Court explicitly attributed the citations to Artificial Intelligence.

Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
  2. Escalate and correct a suspect filing promptly, with a documented response.