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.
Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann Munoz
CA California · Mar 5, 2026
CA / stateEditorial impact: highfake citationsmisrepresented authoritybar referralfamily
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Court and counsel cited 'Marriage of Twigg' as authority on prioritizing parties' emotional well‑being in custody; Twigg does not exist and the citation "34 Cal.3d 926" and parallel citations provided by counsel were fabricated. Court found reliance on this nonexistent authority and counsel later admitted Twigg was fictitious. Outcome: Monetary sanction; Bar referral.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Court and counsel cited 'Marriage of Twigg' as authority on prioritizing parties' emotional well‑being in custody; Twigg does not exist and the citation "34 Cal.3d 926" and parallel citations provided by counsel were fabricated. Court found reliance on this nonexistent authority and counsel later admitted Twigg was fictitious. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel cited 'In re Marriage of Teegarden' with an incorrect citation/year and attributed a holding about emotional well‑being and pet custody that the real 1986 Teegarden decision did not hold; the citation and asserted holding were misrepresented.
- Why it matters now
- A single fictitious case plus a misquoted real one triggers a $5K fine and bar referral; mandate partner sign-off on every cited authority.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Court and counsel cited 'Marriage of Twigg' as authority on prioritizing parties' emotional well‑being in custody; Twigg does not exist and the citation "34 Cal.3d 926" and parallel citations provided by counsel were fabricated. Court found reliance on this nonexistent authority and counsel later admitted Twigg was fictitious. Outcome: Monetary sanction; Bar referral.
Operational lesson
A single fictitious case plus a misquoted real one triggers a $5K fine and bar referral; mandate partner sign-off on every cited authority.
Record details
CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtCA California
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit9th Circuit
DateMar 5, 2026
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer; Judge
OutcomeMonetary sanction; Bar referral
Known amount$5,000
Professional sanctionYes
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
Monetary sanction; Bar referral
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Court and counsel cited 'Marriage of Twigg' as authority on prioritizing parties' emotional well‑being in custody; Twigg does not exist and the citation "34 Cal.3d 926" and parallel citations provided by counsel were fabricated. Court found reliance on this nonexistent authority and counsel later admitted Twigg was fictitious.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel cited 'In re Marriage of Teegarden' with an incorrect citation/year and attributed a holding about emotional well‑being and pet custody that the real 1986 Teegarden decision did not hold; the citation and asserted holding were misrepresented.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann Munoz?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Court and counsel cited 'Marriage of Twigg' as authority on prioritizing parties' emotional well‑being in custody; Twigg does not exist and the citation "34 Cal.3d 926" and parallel citations provided by counsel were fabricated. Court found reliance on this nonexistent authority and counsel later admitted Twigg was fictitious. Outcome: Monetary sanction; Bar referral.
- Why does Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann Munoz matter for legal AI risk?
- A single fictitious case plus a misquoted real one triggers a $5K fine and bar referral; mandate partner sign-off on every cited authority.
- What does the public record establish about Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann Munoz?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann Munoz 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.