HomeCasesHarris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.

D. Minnesotta · May 18, 2026

MN / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotescontract

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Taylor v. City of Minneapolis, 202 F. Supp. 3d 933, 941–42 (D. Minn. 2016); the Court found this citation does not appear to exist and actually leads to an unrelated SD Indiana case. Outcome: Warning.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Warning; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. Minnesotta, 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 AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. Minnesotta, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

MinnesotaSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtD. Minnesotta

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit8th Circuit

DateMay 18, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

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

Warning

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Taylor v. City of Minneapolis, 202 F. Supp. 3d 933, 941–42 (D. Minn. 2016); the Court found this citation does not appear to exist and actually leads to an unrelated SD Indiana case.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Berg v. Copeland, 2019 WL 1493461, at *5 (D. Minn. Apr. 4, 2019); the Court found this citation does not appear to exist and instead leads to an unrelated Colorado Court of Appeals case.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Pfannenstiel Architects, Inc. v. Chouteau Petroleum Co.; the Court found the quoted language is not present in that opinion.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Johnson v. Dayton Elec. Mfg. Co.; the Court found the quoted language is not found in that opinion.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Stephenson v. El-Batrawi; the Court found the quoted language is not present in that opinion.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.?: Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Taylor v. City of Minneapolis, 202 F. Supp. 3d 933, 941–42 (D. Minn. 2016); the Court found this citation does not appear to exist and actually leads to an unrelated SD Indiana case. Outcome: Warning.
Why does Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al. matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. Minnesotta, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.?: 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 Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC 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.

Randolph v. Erick Berscheid Trucking, LLC et alD. Minnesotta · May 5, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Leila Kasso v. Police Officers’ Federation of MinneapolisD. Minnesota · Oct 21, 2025same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citations Sharei Torah v. HendelSC New York · Jun 1, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)SWSZ Holding v. SZ GlobalSC Delaware · May 27, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Lagac v. Capital One, N.A.C.D. California · May 22, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Saqib Kafeel v. CJDropshippingN.D. Illinois · May 22, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)

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

MinnesotaSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtD. Minnesotta

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit8th Circuit

DateMay 18, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Berg v. Copeland, 2019 WL 1493461, at *5 (D. Minn. Apr. 4, 2019); the Court found this citation does not appear to exist and instead leads to an unrelated Colorado Court of Appeals case.

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Pfannenstiel Architects, Inc. v. Chouteau Petroleum Co.; the Court found the quoted language is not present in that opinion.

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Johnson v. Dayton Elec. Mfg. Co.; the Court found the quoted language is not found in that opinion.

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff provided a purported quotation attributed to Stephenson v. El-Batrawi; the Court found the quoted language is not present in that opinion.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.?

Why does Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al. matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC et al.?

Which source supports this Harris v. St. Peter Investors, LLC 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.