AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesJohnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice et al
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

Johnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice et al

M.D. Florida · Feb 19, 2026

FL / federalEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationscivil rightstrialStruck Filing
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court struck the plaintiff's response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment because it contained citations to non-existent case law. The court granted the plaintiff leave to refile the response with accurate citations, which the plaintiff subsequently performed.

Why the court cared
Fabricated: Case Law | Watson v. Amedisys Holding, LLC, 298 F. App'x 395, 396 (5th Cir. 2008) || Fabricated: Case Law | Martin v. Dep't of Corrections, 682 So. 2d 331, 333 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
Why it matters now
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in M.D. Florida, with the listed outcome: Brief Struck.

Why this matter is tracked

In a federal civil-rights action, the pro se plaintiff submitted a response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment that contained multiple non-existent legal citations. The court identified these as hallucinated authorities, struck the plaintiff's filing, and granted the plaintiff leave to refile the response with proper citations. The court noted that while pro se litigants are entitled to liberal interpretation of their pleadings, they remain obligated to meet the essential burden of establishing genuine issues of material fact under summary judgment standards. The plaintiff subsequently refiled the response, and the court proceeded to address the merits of the underlying motions for summary judgment.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in M.D. Florida, with the listed outcome: Brief Struck.

Record details

FloridaSingle-state evidence scope
Explore FLOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtM.D. Florida
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit11th Circuit
DateFeb 19, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeThe court struck the plaintiff's response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment due to the inclusion of hallucinated case law.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court identified the citations as hallucinated, implying the use of an AI tool.

Procedural posture

The court struck the plaintiff's response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment and granted leave to refile.

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.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Watson v. Amedisys Holding, LLC, 298 F. App'x 395, 396 (5th Cir. 2008)
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Martin v. Dep't of Corrections, 682 So. 2d 331, 333 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)

Questions this record answers

What happened in Johnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice et al?
The court struck the plaintiff's response to the defendants' motions for summary judgment because it contained citations to non-existent case law. The court granted the plaintiff leave to refile the response with accurate citations, which the plaintiff subsequently performed.
Why does Johnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice et al matter for legal AI risk?
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in M.D. Florida, with the listed outcome: Brief Struck.
What does the public record establish about Johnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice et al?
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 Johnson v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice 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.

Peter J. Allsot v. Naseem LatifM.D. Florida · Jan 20, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsHayes v. Chipotle Mexican GrillM.D. Florida · Jan 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsJacob Barry Allston v. Ron DeSantis, et al.M.D. Florida · Dec 4, 2025same court · pro se + fake citationsCharles C. Force v. Capital One, N.A., et al.M.D. Florida · Oct 15, 2025same court · pro se + fake citationsRose v. Arts Bonita, Inc.M.D. Florida · Aug 12, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsEdwards v. De Cubas & Lewis, P.A.M.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations