Kingdom of Sweden v. Samantha Ashhadi Soliman
CA California · Dec 1, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA California
- Record ID
- kingdom-of-sweden-v-samantha-ashhadi-soliman-2025-12-01
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the trial court's judgment and issued an admonishment regarding the appellant's procedural violations.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court admonished the pro se appellant for filing briefs containing multiple misrepresented cases, fabricated legal quotes, and nonexistent statutory citations. While the court noted these violations could warrant dismissal, it proceeded to affirm the underlying judgment on the merits.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited Southern Cal. Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Com. as holding courts must evaluate standing based on objective evidence; the court noted that Southern Cal. Gas does not discuss standing and thus was misapplied. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant relied on Patterson v. Superior Court for the proposition that courts cannot presume standing; the court observed Patterson does not address standing and that Patterson was disapproved by Ramirez. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | In her reply brief appellant cited a nonexistent 'Code of Civil Procedure section 2330' claiming it mandates how agency relationships must be established; the court treated this statute as a nonexistent citation. || Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Appellant misquoted Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (f)(2), claiming it bars granting summary judgment while a counter-motion is pending; the court noted the subdivision's actual text differs from appellant's description. || False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant attributed the sentence 'Standing is a jurisdictional issue that must be addressed before the merits of a case may be reached.' to Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles; the court found the quoted language does not appear in that opinion. || False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant quoted Angelucci v. Century Supper Club as stating 'A plaintiff must have a real, present interest in the outcome – not just a theoretical or governmental interest in enforcing its laws.' The court found the quote is not in Angelucci.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA California, with the listed outcome: Admonishment.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Contract
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the respondent, Kingdom of Sweden.
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 court noted the appellant's briefs contained errors characteristic of AI-generated 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).
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.