HomeCasesGraham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC

CA Wisconsin · Aug 7, 2025

WI / stateEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authoritycontract

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited legal authorities that do not exist; respondents flagged and court found violations of RULE 809.19(1)(e) and (4)(b). Outcome: Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations. Melvin Graham-Jackson, a pro se litigant, filed an appeal with false legal citations in his briefs, citing non-existent legal authorities and unrelated cases. The Court of Appeals identified this as a violation of Wisconsin's appellate rules. Despite being notified of these issues in the respondents' brief, Graham-Jackson continued to use false citations in his reply brief.…

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 of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations in CA Wisconsin, 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 Unidentified with Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations in CA Wisconsin, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

WisconsinSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtCA Wisconsin

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit7th Circuit

DateAug 7, 2025

AI toolUnidentified

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeMonetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations

Known amount$500

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

Procedural posture

Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited legal authorities that do not exist; respondents flagged and court found violations of RULE 809.19(1)(e) and (4)(b).
Misrepresented: Case Law | Opening brief cited existing authorities wholly unrelated to the propositions asserted; respondents identified and court found violations of briefing rules.
Fabricated: Case Law | Reply brief repeated false legal citations, including non-existent authorities, after being put on notice; court imposed sanctions.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Reply brief cited authorities unrelated to the propositions asserted, perpetuating the briefing-rule violations noted by the court.
Fabricated: Case Law | Relied on non-existent authorities to oppose application of § 805.04 and argue he could unilaterally dismiss Rock Prairie Farms via amended complaint; court rejected as unsupported (fn. 6).
Misrepresented: Case Law | Invoked WIS. STAT. § 971.13 and State v. Garfoot to require a competency determination in this civil action; court held those criminal-competency authorities inapplicable.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC?: Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited legal authorities that do not exist; respondents flagged and court found violations of RULE 809.19(1)(e) and (4)(b). Outcome: Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations. Melvin Graham-Jackson, a pro se litigant, filed an appeal with false legal citations in his briefs, citing non-existent legal authorities and unrelated cases. The Court of Appeals identified this as a violation of Wisconsin's appellate rules. Despite being notified of these issues in the respondents' brief, Graham-Jackson continued to use false citations in his reply brief.…
Why does Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Monetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations in CA Wisconsin, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC?: 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 Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC 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.

Ann K. Cady, Beth L. Corning, and Caron G. Roesler v. Matthew C. O'MalleyCA Wisconsin · Jan 23, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Patterson v. Nuvision Credit UnionCA California (4d) · Jul 2, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified Pamela Blair v. Sanctuary Bluff Homeowners Association, Inc., et al.CA Kentucky · Mar 20, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified Howell Management Services, LLC v. Vashisht-RotaCA California · Dec 15, 2025pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified P-Three Development, LLC v. Therm Flo, Inc.CA Illinois · Jun 30, 2026pro se + fake citations Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. James K. Bernard Jr.CA Illinois · Jun 26, 2026pro 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

Record details

WisconsinSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtCA Wisconsin

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit7th Circuit

DateAug 7, 2025

AI toolUnidentified

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeMonetary sanctions of $500 and requirement for future affidavit on legal citations

Known amount$500

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Opening brief cited legal authorities that do not exist; respondents flagged and court found violations of RULE 809.19(1)(e) and (4)(b).

Misrepresented: Case Law | Opening brief cited existing authorities wholly unrelated to the propositions asserted; respondents identified and court found violations of briefing rules.

Fabricated: Case Law | Reply brief repeated false legal citations, including non-existent authorities, after being put on notice; court imposed sanctions.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Reply brief cited authorities unrelated to the propositions asserted, perpetuating the briefing-rule violations noted by the court.

Fabricated: Case Law | Relied on non-existent authorities to oppose application of § 805.04 and argue he could unilaterally dismiss Rock Prairie Farms via amended complaint; court rejected as unsupported (fn. 6).

Misrepresented: Case Law | Invoked WIS. STAT. § 971.13 and State v. Garfoot to require a competency determination in this civil action; court held those criminal-competency authorities inapplicable.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC?

Why does Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC?

Which source supports this Graham-Jackson v. Martin and Rock Prairie Farms, LLC 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.