Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0N2KKD7Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

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

DC Ontario · Jul 17, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
DC Ontario
Record ID
haddadi-et-al-v-soleimani-et-al-2026-onsc-3920-2026-07-17
Observed outcome
No award of costs as sanctio
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

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 decision-maker 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.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Contract
  • Trial
  • Monetary
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
No award of costs as sanctio
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

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

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.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.
EXPLAINABLE COMPARATORS

Related public matters

AndDone, LLC v. Shante Gaines; Reset Financial Group, LLCW.D. Missouri · Aug 25, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Full Standard Properties, LLC v. SJ 6070, LLCN.D. California · Aug 20, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Brown v. Real Estate Capital of America et al.SC New York · Aug 7, 2026fake citations + contract · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)