AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 12, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 11, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesDorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell
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 76/100. 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

Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell

SC Pennsylvania · May 11, 2026

PA / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfamilytrialNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania identified that a case cited by a pro se litigant was nonexistent. The court documented this finding in its opinion, noting that both its own research and the opposing party's brief confirmed the citation was unlocatable. No specific monetary or professional sanction was imposed for the citation error.

Why the court cared
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: The court's research and Maternal Grandmother's brief indicate the cited case is unlocatable/nonexistent..
Why it matters now
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

Why this matter is tracked

In Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell, the SC Pennsylvania addressed a Fabricated: Case Law in a pro se litigant filing. The linked source records that the court's research and Maternal Grandmother's brief indicate the cited case is unlocatable/nonexistent. The source record does not state a separate procedural consequence. The entry is dated 2026-05-11. It supports a focused account of the authority problem and does not establish an unrecorded AI tool, motive, or wider factual finding. The underlying source should be consulted for the complete filing and any later procedural developments.

Operational lesson

The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

Record details

PennsylvaniaSingle-state evidence scope
Explore PAOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtSC Pennsylvania
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit3rd Circuit
DateMay 11, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeThe appellate court vacated the trial court's custody order and remanded the case, while noting the presence of invalid citations in the record.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of York County, Pennsylvania, regarding a custody order; the Superior Court of Pennsylvania vacated the custody award and remanded for further proceedings.

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 | The court's research and Maternal Grandmother's brief indicate the cited case is unlocatable/nonexistent.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell?
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania identified that a case cited by a pro se litigant was nonexistent. The court documented this finding in its opinion, noting that both its own research and the opposing party's brief confirmed the citation was unlocatable. No specific monetary or professional sanction was imposed for the citation error.
Why does Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell matter for legal AI risk?
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
What does the public record establish about Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell?
Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.
Which source supports this Dorothea Bell v. Kelly Bell 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.

A.C. Appellant v. H.D. AND J.C.SC Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsJessica Baker v. Ryan Joseph BakerSC Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsBisher v. Civic, et al.SC Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsJaclyn Cocco v. Rosario Palmieri, Jr.SC Pennsylvania · May 29, 2026same court · fake citations + familySaber v. Navy Federal Credit UnionSC Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsNationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. KardoshE.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citations