Which source supports this Dorsey v. Ponce, 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.

HomeCasesDorsey v. Ponce, et al.

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 81/100. 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

Dorsey v. Ponce, et al.

N.D. Illinois · Dec 4, 2025

IL / federal Editorial impact: low pro se fake citations civil rights trial Warning

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court issued a warning regarding the plaintiff's use of fabricated and invalid legal citations within his Second Amended Complaint. The court identified specific nonexistent cases, such as 'State v. Slowikowski' and 'U.S. v. Weaver,' and noted that the plaintiff's filings contained numerous other citations that were either incorrect or did not support the arguments presented.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'State v. Slowikowski, Ohio 2003,' which the court could not locate and flagged as an invalid/nonexistent citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'U.S. v. Weaver, 9th Circuit, 2016,' which the court was unable to find and identified as an incorrect or nonexistent citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Mackey v. Town of Allendale, 2021,' a citation the court could not locate and treated as invalid/fabricated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Sanchez v. Dart, 2016,' which the court could not find (noting a different case with that caption exists from 2020), treating the 2016 citation as invalid.
Why it matters now: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Illinois, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Why this matter is tracked

In a pro se civil rights action, the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint included numerous citations to nonexistent or mischaracterized legal authorities. The court noted that the complaint was replete with references to legal principles and cases that either did not exist or did not support the propositions for which they were cited. While the court addressed the merits of the plaintiff's underlying Fourth Amendment, First Amendment, and state tort claims, it explicitly identified the inclusion of these invalid citations in the official record. The court's opinion preserved these citations as written but flagged them as incorrect or nonexistent. The court ultimately dismissed several of the plaintiff's claims for failure to state a claim or lack of standing.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Illinois, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Record details

IllinoisSingle-state evidence scope

Explore ILOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.

CourtN.D. Illinois

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit7th Circuit

DateDec 4, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeThe court issued a warning regarding the inclusion of invalid citations in the complaint and granted the defendants' motion to dismiss in part.

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

The court was considering the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'State v. Slowikowski, Ohio 2003,' which the court could not locate and flagged as an invalid/nonexistent citation.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'U.S. v. Weaver, 9th Circuit, 2016,' which the court was unable to find and identified as an incorrect or nonexistent citation.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Mackey v. Town of Allendale, 2021,' a citation the court could not locate and treated as invalid/fabricated.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Sanchez v. Dart, 2016,' which the court could not find (noting a different case with that caption exists from 2020), treating the 2016 citation as invalid.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Dorsey v. Ponce, et al.?: The court issued a warning regarding the plaintiff's use of fabricated and invalid legal citations within his Second Amended Complaint. The court identified specific nonexistent cases, such as 'State v. Slowikowski' and 'U.S. v. Weaver,' and noted that the plaintiff's filings contained numerous other citations that were either incorrect or did not support the arguments presented.
Why does Dorsey v. Ponce, et al. matter for legal AI risk?: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Illinois, with the listed outcome: Warning.
What does the public record establish about Dorsey v. Ponce, et al.?: 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.
Which source supports this Dorsey v. Ponce, 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.

Ifeoma Delliane Chinedu Obi v. Cook County, Illinois, et al. (2)N.D. Illinois · Jun 10, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Faisal Rahman v. Michael J. Burton, et al.N.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Bettis v. GastonN.D. Illinois · Feb 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Steven E. Hobbs, Sr. v. Igor Goncharko, et al. (2)N.D. Illinois · Jan 16, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Ifeoma Delliane Chinedu Obi v. Cook County, Illinois, et al. (1)N.D. Illinois · Apr 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Steven E. Hobbs, Sr. v. Igor Goncharko, et al. (1)N.D. Illinois · Sep 3, 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 Suggest a correction to this record

Public-record statuspublic record, not an allegation-only entry

Indexing eligibilitypublicly indexable with evidence status disclosed

Evidence-review statusprimary document verified

Published and maintained byManu Ayala · AI VortexIndependent legal AI risk intelligence

Evidence review recorded Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Sep 11, 2026; latest tracked decision Sep 9, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Open N.D. Illinois profile Explore jurisdiction

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology