AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 17, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 13, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesHaddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920

DC Ontario · Jul 17, 2026

CanadaEditorial impact: lowfake citationscontracttrialMonetary
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Legal Norm | Respondents cited a non-existent rule r.61.09(1)(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure; court found no such provision and noted s.131(1) CJA governs costs. Outcome: No award of costs as sanctio.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies fake citations and contract and records No award of costs as sanctio. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects fake citations and contract with No award of costs as sanctio in DC Ontario. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Legal Norm | Respondents cited a non-existent rule r.61.09(1)(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure; court found no such provision and noted s.131(1) CJA governs costs. Outcome: No award of costs as sanctio.

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and contract with No award of costs as sanctio in DC Ontario. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtDC Ontario
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateJul 17, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeNo award of costs as sanctio
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

No award of costs as sanctio

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Fabricated: Legal Norm | Respondents cited a non-existent rule r.61.09(1)(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure; court found no such provision and noted s.131(1) CJA governs costs.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Respondents cited a non-existent case 'Cimpan v. Koliniotis, 2018 ONCA 95'; court searched CanLII/Westlaw/Lexis and found no such case and that 2018 ONCA 95 is actually Turtle Creek Landscape Inc. v. Summit Auto Brokers Inc.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920?
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Respondents cited a non-existent rule r.61.09(1)(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure; court found no such provision and noted s.131(1) CJA governs costs. Outcome: No award of costs as sanctio.
Why does Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920 matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects fake citations and contract with No award of costs as sanctio in DC Ontario. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920?
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 Haddadi et al. v. Soleimani et al., 2026 ONSC 3920 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.

Brown v. Real Estate Capital of America et al.SC New York · Aug 7, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Cristancho et al. v. SWBC Mortgage Corporation et al.S.D. Texas · Aug 4, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Transcontinental Realty Investors, Inc., et al. v. Daniel J. MoosN.D. Texas · Jul 28, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. KardoshE.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Cames et al. v. Lowe's Home CentersM.D. Florida · Jul 16, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Paige Warthen v. Barclays Bank Delaware (Warthen I, II, III)D. Maryland · Jul 13, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)