Kuigoua v. Park
CA California · Nov 10, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA California
- Record ID
- kuigoua-v-park-2025-11-10
- Observed outcome
- The appeal was dismissed as frivolous, and respondents were awarded their costs on appeal.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court dismissed the appeal as frivolous because the pro se appellant repeatedly relied on non-existent case law and misrepresented the holdings of valid cases in his briefs, failing to provide coherent legal arguments or meet his burden of showing error in the trial court's judgment.
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited "Demers v. City of Los Angeles, 42 Cal.App.3d 519, 522 (1974)," which respondents' counsel could not locate and the court found to be a non-existent citation. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant repeatedly relied on Ladd v. Dart Equipment Corp., 230 Cal.App.3d 1088, 1097–1098 (1991) for a proposition the case does not support; the court found the citation misapplied.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA California, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Tort
- Appellate
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appeal from a judgment of dismissal entered by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County; the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
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 opinion implies the use of AI through the context of fabricated citations, though it does not name a specific tool.
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.