Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1MBCCNSGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 11, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Khoury et al v. Intermountain Health Care Inc. et al

D. Utah · Sep 30, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
D. Utah
Record ID
khoury-et-al-v-intermountain-health-care-inc-et-al-2025-09-30
Observed outcome
Case dismissed
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions Outcome: Case dismissed. Case dismissed for "good cause" in light of motions to dismiss expert. Expert had confessed using ChatGPT.

Why the decision-maker cared

The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Case dismissed; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.

Why it matters now

Experts using ChatGPT can sink the whole case — require written AI-disclosure from every expert before retention.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Administrative
  • Trial
  • Case Dismissed
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
ChatGPT
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Case dismissed
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

ChatGPT is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

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.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Limited (medium confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Apply the same source-checking controls to ChatGPT output as to any other research input.
  3. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.
EXPLAINABLE COMPARATORS

Related public matters

Regan Wilkes, et al. v. Canyons School District, et al.D. Utah · May 4, 2026same court · fake citations + administrativeBeus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al.D. Utah · Sep 9, 2026same court · fake citations + trialCarey v. Breakell et al.D. Utah · Jul 30, 2026same court · fake citations + trial