Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Laurie Ibach and Mark Stewart v. Bruce Stewart
SC Alabama · Apr 24, 2026
AL / stateEditorial impact: highfake citationsfabricated quotesbar referralcontract
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Nebraska Court of Appeals decision presented as on‑point; Court found the citation actually pointed to unrelated Iowa criminal cases. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral in SC Alabama, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Nebraska Court of Appeals decision presented as on‑point; Court found the citation actually pointed to unrelated Iowa criminal cases. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral.
Operational lesson
This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral in SC Alabama, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
AlabamaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtSC Alabama
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit11th Circuit
DateApr 24, 2026
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeAdverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral
Known amount$17,200
Professional sanctionYes
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
8 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Nebraska Court of Appeals decision presented as on‑point; Court found the citation actually pointed to unrelated Iowa criminal cases.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a purported Alabama Civil Appellate opinion that does not exist.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited an apparently fictitious Alabama case used to support tolling/estoppel arguments.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed a quotation to Ex parte Helms that does not appear in that opinion; Court found the quoted language absent from Helms.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed language to Ex parte Seabol regarding fiduciary concealment tolling the statute that the Court found is not in the cited pages of Seabol.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Alabama appellate decision repeatedly to support estoppel/limitations arguments.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Janowiak v. Tiesi as supporting a proposition; Court found the quoted material not present and the reporter/pinpoint citations mismatched.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited an apparently fabricated Illinois appellate opinion purportedly imposing constructive trust for undue influence; Court found no case matching the citation/style.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Laurie Ibach and Mark Stewart v. Bruce Stewart?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent Nebraska Court of Appeals decision presented as on‑point; Court found the citation actually pointed to unrelated Iowa criminal cases. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral.
- Why does Laurie Ibach and Mark Stewart v. Bruce Stewart matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order; Doubled Costs; Filing Prohibition; Bar Referral in SC Alabama, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Laurie Ibach and Mark Stewart v. Bruce Stewart?
- 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 Laurie Ibach and Mark Stewart v. Bruce Stewart 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.