Jorge Paredes Guevara v. A&P Restaurant Corp., et al.
S.D. New York · Nov 18, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- S.D. New York
- Record ID
- jorge-paredes-guevara-v-ap-restaurant-corp-et-al-2025-11-18
- Observed outcome
- The motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice, and the court issued a formal warning to counsel regarding the use of fabricated authorities.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court identified that plaintiff's counsel submitted fabricated case law, misrepresented existing authorities, and quoted non-existent statutory provisions. Although the court characterized this as sanctionable conduct under Rule 11, it exercised its discretion to decline the imposition of formal sanctions, instead issuing a formal warning to counsel.
Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited Marrero v. Camden Steel Co., 850 F. Supp. 188 (D.N.J. 1994); court identified this authority as non-existent. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Counsel cited Baldwin v. Trailer Inns, Inc., 266 F.3d 1104, 1110–11 (9th Cir. 2001) for an FMLA proposition; court noted Baldwin does not mention the FMLA and involves FLSA/breach of contract issues. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited Kennedy v. Cmty. Action Servs., 107 F. Supp. 2d 993 (N.D. Ind. 2000); court identified this authority as non-existent. || False Quotes: Case Law | Counsel attributed a non-existent quote to Johnson v. City of Shelby, 574 U.S. 10 (2014); court noted the quoted language does not appear in Johnson. || False Quotes: Legal Norm | Counsel quoted non-existent provisions of NYLL § 215 (statutory language the court found was not present in the statute).
Fabricated statutory quotes (NYLL §215) are as damning as fake cases — verify statutes against the code, not AI.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Employment
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- unspecified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint with prejudice, following the plaintiff's submission of an opposition brief containing fabricated and misrepresented legal authorities.
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 court did not name a specific tool, only identifying the conduct as sanctionable.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.