In the Matter of the Estate of CAROL M. CAREY
CA Washington · Mar 3, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Washington
- Record ID
- in-the-matter-of-the-estate-of-carol-m-carey-2026-03-03
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the lower court's summary judgment, denied the appellant's requests, and granted the respondents' motion for attorney fees and sanctions for a frivolous appeal.
- Known monetary consequence
- $1
Why this matter warrants attention
The court sanctioned the appellant for filing a frivolous appeal, awarding attorney fees and costs to the respondents. While the court explicitly noted the appellant's repeated use of fabricated and inapplicable case law, it declined to impose separate sanctions for those specific violations, opting instead to sanction the appeal as a whole.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Stoler, 113 Wn. App. 104 (2002)'; court found this citation incorrect and corresponding to State v. Neely, 113 Wn. App. 100 (a criminal case) and thus inapplicable. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Estate of Wallace v. Palmer, 103 Wn. App. 1064 (2000)', which the court noted does not appear to exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Powers, 255 Ill. App. 3d 1006 (1994)', which the court found does not appear to exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'McIntosh v. McIntosh, 282 Ga. 610, 652 S.E.2d 546 (2007)', which the court indicated does not appear to exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Griffith, 327 P.3d 612 (Colo. 2014)', which the court determined does not appear to exist. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Perez v. Pappas, 98 Wn.2d 835, 659 P.2d 475 (1983)', which the court found inapplicable to the estate/TEDRA issues raised.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA Washington, with the listed outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucination_of_case_law
- Misrepresentation_of_legal_authority
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Other
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- $1
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a superior court's summary judgment order in a probate and TEDRA matter.
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 court identified repeated citations to fabricated or inapplicable case law.
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.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.