Kamps v. British Crown Corporation, et al.
W.D. Michigan · Jan 7, 2026 · Paul L. Maloney
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- W.D. Michigan
- Record ID
- kamps-v-british-crown-corporation-et-al-2026-01-07
- Observed outcome
- The court overruled the plaintiff's objections and adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the case as frivolous.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court dismissed the plaintiff's case as frivolous after the pro se litigant submitted objections containing a fabricated quotation attributed to a 1795 Supreme Court case. The court explicitly identified the quote as fake and rejected the plaintiff's sovereign-citizen arguments as a waste of judicial resources.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a fabricated quotation to Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators, asserting governments are "abstractions" that cannot interact with "the tangible"; the Court identified the quote as fake and not in the 1795 prize case.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in W.D. Michigan, with the listed outcome: Case dismissed as frivolous..
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Other
- Trial
- Case Dismissed
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- No tool named in source
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The District Court reviewed a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R) following the plaintiff's filing of objections. The Court overruled the objections and adopted the R&R, resulting in the dismissal of the action.
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.
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.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.