In re the Marriage of Joanne Rodrigues and Nathan Craig
CA California (6d) · Apr 22, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA California (6d)
- Record ID
- in-re-the-marriage-of-joanne-rodrigues-and-nathan-craig-2026-04-22
- Observed outcome
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, rejecting the appellant's challenges to spousal support, property division, and sanctions.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The California Court of Appeal identified that the pro se appellant's brief contained numerous nonexistent cases and incorrect citations. While the court noted this conduct could justify dismissing the appeal as frivolous, it ultimately affirmed the trial court's judgment based on the appellant's failure to provide an adequate record and failure to support her arguments with reasoned legal authority.
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Appellant's brief cited this case as authority; the court identified it as fictitious/nonexistent..
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucinated_case_law
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Family
- Appellate
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a trial court judgment in a marital dissolution action, following a court trial held between July 2022 and July 2024.
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 opinion notes the appellant cited nonexistent cases, implying the use of AI tools.
Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
- Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
- Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.