AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 5, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 3, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesDouglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company

D.C. Court of Appeals · Sep 3, 2026

/ federalEditorial impact: highfake citationsbar referralothertrialBar Referral
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Abadie v. District of Columbia; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation. Outcome: Brief Stricken; Bar Referral.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies fake citations and bar referral and records Brief Stricken; Bar Referral. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Brief Stricken; Bar Referral in D.C. Court of Appeals. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Abadie v. District of Columbia; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation. Outcome: Brief Stricken; Bar Referral.

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Brief Stricken; Bar Referral in D.C. Court of Appeals. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtD.C. Court of Appeals
Jurisdictionfederal
CircuitNot recorded
DateSep 3, 2026
GO
AI toolGoogle AI
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeBrief Stricken; Bar Referral
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

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

Procedural posture

Brief Stricken; Bar Referral

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.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Abadie v. District of Columbia; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Cason v. National Consumer Co-op Bank; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation.
  3. Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Osborne v. District of Columbia; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation.
  4. Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Woods v. United States; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company?
Fabricated: Case Law | The appellee's brief cited a nonexistent case purportedly named Abadie v. District of Columbia; the attorney admitted the authority was not legitimate, and the court declined to reproduce the fabricated citation. Outcome: Brief Stricken; Bar Referral.
Why does Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Brief Stricken; Bar Referral in D.C. Court of Appeals. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company?
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded link is a secondary public source and should be checked against the docket where available. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Which source supports this Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company summary?
The recorded source is reason.com. It is classified as secondary or other linked source; 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.

Lodhia v Twelve TreesKing's Bench · Jul 24, 2026fake citations + bar referralCartagena v. Dixon, Blackburn, and T.A. Blackburn Law (2)S.D. New York · Jul 10, 2026fake citations + bar referralLiveVideo.AI Corp. v. RedstoneS.D. New York · Jun 9, 2026fake citations + bar referralMercado E Açougue Sao Lucas Eireli v Pluxee Beneficios BrasilTJ Parana · May 15, 2026fake citations + bar referralRivera v. Triad Props. Corp.N.D. Alabama · Mar 31, 2026fake citations + bar referralAmanda Jacintha de Souza v. Atual Companhia Securitizadora de Créditos FinanceirosTJ Rio de Janeiro · Feb 24, 2026fake citations + bar referral