Johnny Tyson II v. Warren Inn Haltom City Ltd. d/b/a Acacia Apartments
CA Texas (2d) · Oct 22, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Texas (2d)
- Record ID
- johnny-tyson-ii-v-warren-inn-haltom-city-ltd-d-b-a-acacia-apartments-2026-10-22
- Observed outcome
- None Adjudicated
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Misrepresented: Case Law | Tyson characterized McEwen as holding that a state court lacks jurisdiction to render judgment after removal and that such judgment is void. The court explained that McEwen actually held that appeal by writ of error or bill of review were the exclusive methods for setting aside the default judgment and that the trial court’s order vacating it was void.
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records a recorded judicial or procedural response. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in CA Texas (2d). It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Landlord Tenant
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- No tool named in source
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
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.
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.