Heys v. Dobberstein
CC Michigan · Jun 3, 2025
Short answer. Status: Monetary Sanction; Reprimand; amount: USD 1,499. CC Michigan, decision date on record June 3, 2025. As of November 13, 2026. Court source · Methodology
- Jurisdiction
- State
- Court
- CC Michigan
- Record ID
- heys-v-dobberstein-2025-06-03
- Observed outcome
- Monetary Sanction; Reprimand
- Known monetary consequence
- $1,499
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | The pleading cited Berger v. Berger, 504 Mich. 984 (2002), and the court ordered counsel to produce a copy for verification; the order did not expressly find the citation fabricated. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Reprimand. The reprimand was later confirmed in disciplinary proceedings (see here).
The structured public record identifies fake citations and fabricated quotes and records Monetary Sanction; Reprimand. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with Monetary Sanction; Reprimand in CC Michigan. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Family
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- No tool named in source
- Known monetary consequence
- $1,499
- Procedural posture
- Monetary Sanction; Reprimand
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
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.
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.