Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-16RZTQWGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Kennon v. Ashley

D. Kansas · Feb 18, 2026

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
D. Kansas
Record ID
kennon-v-ashley-2026-02-18
Observed outcome
The court issued an order to show cause why counsel should not be sanctioned under Rule 11.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court issued an order to show cause why Plaintiff's counsel should not be sanctioned under Rule 11 for repeatedly including fabricated quotes and nonexistent deposition testimony in a motion for reconsideration. The court found the pattern of misrepresentation egregious and ordered counsel to explain the conduct within seven days.

Why the decision-maker cared

False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | A block-quoted colloquy attributed to Ashley (including 'what he said, not what he did' and 'It was the language') is quoted as from Doc.55-1 at 33:2-11 but the court found those phrases do not appear at that location or elsewhere in the deposition. || False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff quotes exchanges purportedly showing Ashley answered 'No, not that I recall,' 'There was no contact,' and 'not threatening'; court found those quoted answers do not appear in the cited portions of Ashley's deposition (Doc.55-1 at 107:13-15,108:2-6,109:1-4). || False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff attributes to Spencer a block quote denying any threatening behavior after watching bodycam ('No. I didn't.' / 'He didn't do that'); court found those phrases and the quoted exchange do not appear at Doc.55-2 80:4-6,81:1-3. || False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff quotes Ashley as saying he concluded disorderly conduct 'after reviewing the video footage' (Doc.55-1 at 151:4-9); court found the deposition does not contain 'footage' or the asserted colloquy at the cited location. || False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff attributes to Ashley a short exchange ('No.' / 'So why did you arrest him?' / 'He said, "Take me to jail." I said, "Okay."') citing Doc.55-1 at 116:12-17; court found the quoted exchange as presented does not exist and omits surrounding context that contradicts the representation. || False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff quotes a long passage allegedly from Doc.55-1 at 161:22-162:16; the court found the precise quoted passage does not exist at that citation. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff's brief quotes Ashley as admitting the arrest was based solely on 'language' and that there were 'no threatening gestures or movements'; court found the quoted phrase does not appear at Doc.55-1 33:7-11 or elsewhere in the deposition. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Brief asserts Ashley testified he did not determine probable cause until months later after reviewing video; court found the cited portion (Doc.55-1 at 151:4-13) does not support that statement and the word 'footage' does not appear there. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff claims both Ashley and Spencer confirmed Kennon made no threatening gestures and 'never chested up' in a disorderly-conduct manner; court found Ashley's cited testimony actually describes chesting up and Spencer's testimony differs, so the quoted summary is inaccurate/nonexistent.

Why it matters now

Every block quote from a deposition must be copy-pasted from the certified transcript, not paraphrased by AI.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fabricated Citations
  • Hallucinated Quotes
  • Misrepresentation Of Record
  • Fake Citations
  • Fabricated Quotes
  • Civil Rights
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
The court took the Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration under advisement and issued an order to show cause regarding potential Rule 11 sanctions.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The court order does not name a specific tool, implying the use of AI through the nature of the hallucinations.

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).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
  2. Assign a responsible reviewer for AI-assisted research and drafting.
  3. Retain a matter-level record of source checks and corrections.