Kessler v. City of Atwater
E.D. California · Jul 11, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The court issued an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed against attorney Brian K. Cuttone for filing briefs containing six fabricated cases, multiple non-existent quotations, and misrepresented legal authorities, in violation of the duty of honesty to the court.
- Why the court cared
- The court reasoned that the attorney violated the basic duty to be honest with the court by proffering non-existent cases and fabricated quotes, which wasted judicial resources and delayed the resolution of pending motions.
- Why it matters now
- Pull and read every cited case before filing; OSCs follow when courts find six fabricated cases and multiple false quotes in one brief.
Why this matter is tracked
In Kessler v. City of Atwater, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an order to show cause regarding potential sanctions against attorney Brian K. Cuttone. The court identified numerous instances of professional misconduct in the attorney's filings, including the citation of six non-existent cases, the inclusion of fabricated quotations, and the misrepresentation of existing case law to support legal arguments. The court noted that these errors were not mere typographical mistakes but appeared to be created out of whole cloth, wasting significant judicial resources. The court ordered the attorney to verify all citations, provide copies of cited authorities, and explain the circumstances of the filings under oath to determine if sanctions are warranted.
Pull and read every cited case before filing; OSCs follow when courts find six fabricated cases and multiple false quotes in one brief.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Order to show cause issued for potential sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and the court's inherent power.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
18 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: Gonzalez v. County of Los Angeles; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: McGill v. City of Redding; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: Ramos v. County of Madera; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: Yaka v. City of San Jose; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: Simmons v. City of Sacramento; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited non-existent case: Kohn v. Kohn; court found no such case exists and appears created out of whole cloth.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Fabricated quotation attributed to Espindola; court found the quoted language does not appear and the phrase "place of business" is absent.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Fabricated quotation attributed to Harrell; court found the quote does not appear and the word "arbiters" is not used in the opinion.
Show 10 additional discrepancies
- False Quotes: Case Law | Fabricated quotation attributed to City of Montebello v. Vasquez; court found the quoted language does not exist and the term "tortious" is not used.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Fabricated quotation attributed to Navellier; court noted the language does not appear and the case in fact holds the opposite regarding anti-SLAPP.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Caldwell as supporting liability for intentional torts like defamation/fraud; court noted Caldwell does not address those torts and instead concerns FEHA immunity.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Turner as eliminating Government Claims Act filing for defamation/fraud; court explained Turner involved premises liability from a shooting and did not address that proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Cameron as stating government employees are not immune from intentional torts; court said Cameron is limited to design immunity/duty to warn and noted the brief’s citation was incorrect (correct: 7 Cal.3d 318).
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Cornell to claim no § 820.2 immunity when acting with malice, fraud, or oppression; court noted Cornell at cited pages discusses Bane Act and elsewhere false arrest immunity, not that proposition.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Thayer as holding fraudulent conduct is never protected under anti-SLAPP; court said Thayer did not reach or speak to that issue.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim to claim defamation is not insulated by anti-SLAPP; court said it merely observed many SLAPPs involve defamation and did not issue that holding.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Kashian to assert fraud and breach of contract are inherently unlawful and not protected speech; court said Kashian did not so hold and page 905 defines SLAPP rather than excluding contract claims.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misrepresented Hagberg to argue alleged obstructive and defamatory conduct falls outside protected petitioning/speech; court said Hagberg addressed Civil Code § 47(b) privilege for reports to police, not the asserted proposition.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Kessler v. City of Atwater?
- The court issued an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed against attorney Brian K. Cuttone for filing briefs containing six fabricated cases, multiple non-existent quotations, and misrepresented legal authorities, in violation of the duty of honesty to the court.
- Why does Kessler v. City of Atwater matter for legal AI risk?
- Pull and read every cited case before filing; OSCs follow when courts find six fabricated cases and multiple false quotes in one brief.
- What does the public record establish about Kessler v. City of Atwater?
- 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 Kessler v. City of Atwater 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.