Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0YKB9CDGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Jacob Barry Allston v. Ron DeSantis, et al.

M.D. Florida · Dec 4, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
M.D. Florida
Record ID
jacob-barry-allston-v-ron-desantis-et-al-2025-12-04
Observed outcome
The court overruled the plaintiff's objections, dismissed the Second Amended Complaint without prejudice, and issued a formal warning regarding the use of fabricated legal authority.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court issued a formal warning to a pro se litigant for submitting filings containing fabricated case law and false quotations. The court explicitly attributed the likely source of these errors to the use of AI technology and cautioned that future occurrences of such conduct would result in severe sanctions, including potential dismissal with prejudice.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a purported Eleventh Circuit case 'United States v. Roses, 39 F.4th 113 (11th Cir. 2022)' which the Court found does not appear to be a real case. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation to Jackson v. Bank of Am. that the Court and opposing counsel showed does not appear in that decision. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quote to Varnes v. Local 91 (674 F.2d 1365) that the Court found is not present in that case.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in M.D. Florida, with the listed outcome: Warning.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Hallucinated_case_law
  • Fabricated_quotations
  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Fabricated Quotes
  • Civil Rights
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Order on objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and various non-dispositive orders.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The court noted the plaintiff may be using AI technology.

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).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
  2. Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.