José Carlos Pinto de Faria v. Prevent TWB do Brasil et al.
TJ San Paulo · Dec 1, 2025
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Attorney reproduced an ementa/precedent at fl. 6 that the court could not locate; number was incomplete (marked by repeated 'x'); court concluded it was an AI-generated, nonexistent precedent and not a real decision. Outcome: Monetary Fine; Bar Referral. The court found that the agravante (through his counsel) reproduced a 'precedent' ementa that does not correspond to any real judgment and contained an incomplete case number (marked with repeated 'x'), concluding it was likely an AI 'alucinação' (fabricated citation) resulting from misuse of an intelligence‑assistance tool. The majority treated this as litigância de má-fé and imposed a fine of 2% of the updated value of the cause and ordered a copy sent to OAB/SP; a dissenting judge would have excused the attorney for lack of dolo and declined to impose the fine.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies fake citations and bar referral and records Monetary Fine; Bar Referral. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Monetary Fine; Bar Referral in TJ San Paulo. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Attorney reproduced an ementa/precedent at fl. 6 that the court could not locate; number was incomplete (marked by repeated 'x'); court concluded it was an AI-generated, nonexistent precedent and not a real decision. Outcome: Monetary Fine; Bar Referral. The court found that the agravante (through his counsel) reproduced a 'precedent' ementa that does not correspond to any real judgment and contained an incomplete case number (marked with repeated 'x'), concluding it was likely an AI 'alucinação' (fabricated citation) resulting from misuse of an intelligence‑assistance tool. The majority treated this as litigância de má-fé and imposed a fine of 2% of the updated value of the cause and ordered a copy sent to OAB/SP; a dissenting judge would have excused the attorney for lack of dolo and declined to impose the fine.
This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Monetary Fine; Bar Referral in TJ San Paulo. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Monetary Fine; Bar Referral
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Attorney reproduced an ementa/precedent at fl. 6 that the court could not locate; number was incomplete (marked by repeated 'x'); court concluded it was an AI-generated, nonexistent precedent and not a real decision.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in José Carlos Pinto de Faria v. Prevent TWB do Brasil et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Attorney reproduced an ementa/precedent at fl. 6 that the court could not locate; number was incomplete (marked by repeated 'x'); court concluded it was an AI-generated, nonexistent precedent and not a real decision. Outcome: Monetary Fine; Bar Referral. The court found that the agravante (through his counsel) reproduced a 'precedent' ementa that does not correspond to any real judgment and contained an incomplete case number (marked with repeated 'x'), concluding it was likely an AI 'alucinação' (fabricated citation) resulting from misuse of an intelligence‑assistance tool. The majority treated this as litigância de má-fé and imposed a fine of 2% of the updated value of the cause and ordered a copy sent to OAB/SP; a dissenting judge would have excused the attorney for lack of dolo and declined to impose the fine.
- Why does José Carlos Pinto de Faria v. Prevent TWB do Brasil et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and bar referral with Monetary Fine; Bar Referral in TJ San Paulo. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about José Carlos Pinto de Faria v. Prevent TWB do Brasil et al.?
- 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 José Carlos Pinto de Faria v. Prevent TWB do Brasil 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.