AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 17, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 13, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesJoann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC
Evidence review: primary document limited. The primary document was retrieved, but one or more case-level facts could not be tied to a page-located passage. The structured corpus baseline is preserved without upgrading those claims.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 80/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Joann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC

CA Texas · Apr 23, 2026

TX / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationscontractappellateNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Denman' at 462 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2015, no pet.); the court found this citation incorrect/misplaced (page cite corresponds to an Arkansas criminal case) and that Texas decisions titled In re Denman have different cites.

Why the court cared
The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in CA Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Denman' at 462 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2015, no pet.); the court found this citation incorrect/misplaced (page cite corresponds to an Arkansas criminal case) and that Texas decisions titled In re Denman have different cites.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in CA Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

TexasSingle-state evidence scope
Explore TXOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtCA Texas
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit5th Circuit
DateApr 23, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
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

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

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Denman' at 462 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2015, no pet.); the court found this citation incorrect/misplaced (page cite corresponds to an Arkansas criminal case) and that Texas decisions titled In re Denman have different cites.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant referenced 'Hercenberger v. Proctor' without a reporter citation; the court found no binding authority by that name and no supporting citation.
  3. Fabricated: Doctrinal Work | Appellant cited a study titled 'Underestimating the Unrepresented: Cognitive Biases Disadvantage Pro Se Litigants in Family Law Cases'; the court indicated it could find no record of a binding authority or known publication by that name.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Joann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC?
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'In re Estate of Denman' at 462 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2015, no pet.); the court found this citation incorrect/misplaced (page cite corresponds to an Arkansas criminal case) and that Texas decisions titled In re Denman have different cites.
Why does Joann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in CA Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Joann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC?
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 Joann Crawford v. Buffalo Creek Properties, LLC 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.

Christian Lavell Jennings v. Vandergriff HondaCA Texas · May 28, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsIn the Interest of Q.C. and P.C., ChildrenCA Texas · Jul 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsParis v. ParisCA Texas · Jun 25, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsShaddai Harris v. Nadia Lyotard and Mitchell SadlerCA Texas · Jun 12, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsAmanda Adams v. Allen Butler Construction, Inc.CA Texas · May 5, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsK.C. v. D.R.CA Texas · Apr 30, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations