AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
Search free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Nov 8, 2026 · Latest decision Nov 3, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesJaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 76/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Jaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al.

Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.

Cite this record

E.D. Missouri · Sep 9, 2026

MO / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotestortNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The court stated that plaintiffs’ filings cited non-existent cases for non-existent quotations, but did not identify the specific citations or quotations.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records a recorded judicial or procedural response. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in E.D. Missouri. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | The court stated that plaintiffs’ filings cited non-existent cases for non-existent quotations, but did not identify the specific citations or quotations.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in E.D. Missouri. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

MissouriSingle-state evidence scope
Explore MOOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtE.D. Missouri
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit8th Circuit
DateSep 9, 2026
First seenSep 24, 2026 (in this dataset)
AI toolNo tool named in source
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

Procedural posture

Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.

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 | The court stated that plaintiffs’ filings cited non-existent cases for non-existent quotations, but did not identify the specific citations or quotations.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Jaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al.?
Fabricated: Case Law | The court stated that plaintiffs’ filings cited non-existent cases for non-existent quotations, but did not identify the specific citations or quotations.
Why does Jaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al. matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in E.D. Missouri. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Jaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al.?
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.
Which source supports this Jaber v. Title Premier, LLC et al. 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.

Theoda E. Mills, Jr. v. City of St. Louis, et al.E.D. Missouri · Jan 30, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsMegan Cowden v. US Treasury & IRSE.D. Missouri · Oct 20, 2025same court · pro se + fake citationsBeard v. Frasier et al.E.D. Missouri · Sep 15, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsSyreeta LaShawn McNeal v. Vera L. Calvin, et al.E.D. Missouri · May 19, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsHolmes v. Cape Meadows Apartments HRMSE.D. Missouri · Jul 10, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsJaii LeShawn Quinones v. Unknown Love, et al.E.D. Missouri · Mar 31, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations

This record involves a self-represented party. See all pro se litigant AI hallucination decisions in the corpus, with counts by year, country and outcome.

Weekly alert

Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases

One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.