In re S.A., D.H., and B.M., Minors
CA Illinois · Dec 29, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Illinois
- Record ID
- in-re-sa-dh-and-bm-minors-2025-12-29
- Observed outcome
- Warning
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
False Quotes: Case Law | Respondent cited a fictitious quote from In re A.S., asserting 'Reasonable progress does not require complete agreement with the Department's version of events,' which the court found not present in that decision. Outcome: Warning.
False Quotes: Case Law | Respondent cited a fictitious quote from In re A.S., asserting 'Reasonable progress does not require complete agreement with the Department's version of events,' which the court found not present in that decision. || False Quotes: Case Law | Respondent attributed a fabricated quote to In re J.L., claiming 'Parents may dispute details of the incident while still making progress toward correcting the conditions that led to removal,' which the court said J.L. did not address. || False Quotes: Case Law | Respondent drew a fictitious conclusion from In re M.A., quoting that termination "cannot rest on a parent's personality traits or imperfect cooperation unless those conditions prevent the parent from safely parenting," which the court found was not in M.A. || False Quotes: Case Law | Respondent attributed the quote 'A parent is not required to parrot the agency's exact narrative.' to In re Brianna B.; the court found the quote fictitious and not addressed in that opinion.
Fictitious holdings in parental-rights briefs get named publicly; verify every quoted proposition against the cited opinion before filing.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Family
- Appellate
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Warning
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
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Assign a responsible reviewer for AI-assisted research and drafting.