Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Jane Doe, et al. v. Lincoln Consolidated Schools, et al.
E.D. Michigan · Mar 23, 2026
MI / federalEditorial impact: lowfake citationscivil rightstrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case string "Doe v. Univ. of Mich., No. 18-11914, 2019 WL 11793988, at *8 (E.D. Mich., Aug. 6, 2019)"; the Court could not locate the authority, characterized it as an AI‑hallucinated/"Frankenstein" citation, and ordered counsel to reimburse defendants for research costs. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Adverse Costs Order; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Courts now order fee-shifting for opposing counsel's wasted research on fake cites — verify or pay their bill.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case string "Doe v. Univ. of Mich., No. 18-11914, 2019 WL 11793988, at *8 (E.D. Mich., Aug. 6, 2019)"; the Court could not locate the authority, characterized it as an AI‑hallucinated/"Frankenstein" citation, and ordered counsel to reimburse defendants for research costs. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
Operational lesson
Courts now order fee-shifting for opposing counsel's wasted research on fake cites — verify or pay their bill.
Record details
MichiganSingle-state evidence scope
CourtE.D. Michigan
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit6th Circuit
DateMar 23, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeAdverse Costs Order
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
reported
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Procedural posture
Adverse Costs Order
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.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case string "Doe v. Univ. of Mich., No. 18-11914, 2019 WL 11793988, at *8 (E.D. Mich., Aug. 6, 2019)"; the Court could not locate the authority, characterized it as an AI‑hallucinated/"Frankenstein" citation, and ordered counsel to reimburse defendants for research costs.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Jane Doe, et al. v. Lincoln Consolidated Schools, et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited a non-existent case string "Doe v. Univ. of Mich., No. 18-11914, 2019 WL 11793988, at *8 (E.D. Mich., Aug. 6, 2019)"; the Court could not locate the authority, characterized it as an AI‑hallucinated/"Frankenstein" citation, and ordered counsel to reimburse defendants for research costs. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why does Jane Doe, et al. v. Lincoln Consolidated Schools, et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- Courts now order fee-shifting for opposing counsel's wasted research on fake cites — verify or pay their bill.
- What does the public record establish about Jane Doe, et al. v. Lincoln Consolidated Schools, 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 Jane Doe, et al. v. Lincoln Consolidated Schools, 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.