AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 15, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 11, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesIn the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 76/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi

SC New York · Apr 27, 2026

NY / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsadministrativetrialNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court observed that the pro se petitioner cited nonexistent case law in his memorandum. Although the respondent characterized these as AI hallucinations, the court did not impose sanctions, noting that the respondent did not formally request them, and instead dismissed the petition on substantive grounds.

Why the court cared
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Petitioner cited nonexistent case law in his memorandum; court observed some citations appeared fabricated..
Why it matters now
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

Why this matter is tracked

In In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi, the SC New York addressed a Fabricated: Case Law in a pro se litigant filing. The linked source records that petitioner cited nonexistent case law in his memorandum; court observed some citations appeared fabricated. The source record does not state a separate procedural consequence. The entry is dated 2026-04-27. It supports a focused account of the authority problem and does not establish an unrecorded AI tool, motive, or wider factual finding.

Operational lesson

The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

Record details

New YorkSingle-state evidence scope
Explore NYOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtSC New York
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit2nd Circuit
DateApr 27, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeThe court granted the respondent's motion to dismiss the petition. No sanctions were imposed regarding the fabricated citations.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

alleged

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

Procedural posture

The court granted the respondent's motion to dismiss the petition pursuant to CPLR § 3211(a)(7) after oral argument.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner cited nonexistent case law in his memorandum; court observed some citations appeared fabricated.

Questions this record answers

What happened in In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi?
The court observed that the pro se petitioner cited nonexistent case law in his memorandum. Although the respondent characterized these as AI hallucinations, the court did not impose sanctions, noting that the respondent did not formally request them, and instead dismissed the petition on substantive grounds.
Why does In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi matter for legal AI risk?
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
What does the public record establish about In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi?
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.
Which source supports this In the Matter of the Application of Jonathan David Rinaldi 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.

Kevin Krzeminski v. Janine McQuillanSC New York · Jul 6, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsSharei Torah v. HendelSC New York · Jun 1, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsGully v VargheseSC New York · May 12, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsHilpert v. 16 Judge SPV LLCSC New York · Dec 4, 2025same court · pro se + fake citationsMorris Gafni v. Rapid Foreclosure Refunds et al.SC New York · Nov 21, 2025same court · pro se + fake citationsWheat v. VichieSC New York · Nov 3, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations