Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1POOL8XGenerated September 10, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

James Fahey v. Wally’s Las Vegas, LLC, et al.

D. Nevada · Dec 10, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
D. Nevada
Record ID
james-fahey-v-wallys-las-vegas-llc-et-al-2025-12-10
Observed outcome
The court granted the defendant's motion to compel discovery, denied the plaintiff's request for a protective order, and issued a warning regarding the use of AI-generated citations.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court issued a formal warning to a pro se litigant regarding the inclusion of AI-hallucinated case citations in a response brief. While the court granted the defendant's motion to compel discovery, it did not impose monetary or professional sanctions at this time, but explicitly cautioned that future use of nonexistent citations could result in sanctions.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Hagen v. Williams, No. 2:18-cv-00425, 2020 WL 1272618,' but the court found the case name, docket number, and database identifier do not correspond and the citation appears nonexistent. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'U.S. ex rel. Poehling v. UnitedHealth Grp., Inc., 2018 WL 845548, at *5,' but the court concluded the case name exists while the database identifier/electronic report number provided does not correspond and the cited order does not support Plaintiff's parenthetical explanation. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited language to 'Solis v. Zenith Capital, LLC, No. C 08-4854 PJH, 2009 WL 1324051, at *3,' but the court found the quoted material does not appear in the order cited and the order does not address the issue Plaintiff attributed to it.

Why it matters now

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

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Hallucinated_case_law
  • Misrepresented_case_law
  • False_quotes
  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Fabricated Quotes
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Order on Defendant's motion to compel discovery and Plaintiff's request for a protective order.
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 identified the citations as AI hallucinations.

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.