Levy v. Google LLC
W.D. Washington · Dec 22, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The court issued a warning to the pro se plaintiff for citing nonexistent case law and misquoting authorities in his opposition brief. The court explicitly stated that such behavior is unacceptable and could lead to sanctions, despite the plaintiff's pro se status.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Kelley v. Conan, 555 F.3d 630, 634 (8th Cir. 2009); the court could not locate this case and found the citation appears to be nonexistent. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff referenced 'Exhibit X' and 'Exhibit Y' in support of asserted meetings but did not file or locate those exhibits in the record; the court found the referenced exhibits were absent. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited and quoted language attributed to Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, Inc. but provided an incorrect citation and the quoted language does not appear in the actual Diaz opinion; the court noted the citation error and that the case does not address pretext. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Villiarimo with an incorrect citation and attributed language not found in the actual Villiarimo decision; the court flagged the miscitation and misquotation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Springer v. Boeing, 138 Wash. App. 248 (1997); the court was unable to locate the case and noted the citation does not appear in legal databases. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Bahrampour v. Lampert and attributed language and an employment-law proposition not present in that decision; the court noted the quotation/language does not appear in the cited opinion.
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in W.D. Washington, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Why this matter is tracked
In an employment discrimination and wrongful termination suit, the pro se plaintiff submitted an opposition brief containing multiple fabricated case citations, nonexistent exhibits, and misattributed quotations. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Google, finding the plaintiff failed to provide competent evidence of pretext. Regarding the plaintiff's conduct, the court explicitly identified several nonexistent cases (Kelley v. Conan, Springer v. Boeing) and misquoted authorities (Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Bahrampour v. Lampert). The court issued a formal warning to the plaintiff, noting that while it is mindful of his pro se status, such misconduct will not be tolerated and could result in future sanctions.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in W.D. Washington, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Summary judgment granted for defendant; warning issued to plaintiff regarding litigation conduct.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
6 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Kelley v. Conan, 555 F.3d 630, 634 (8th Cir. 2009); the court could not locate this case and found the citation appears to be nonexistent.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff referenced 'Exhibit X' and 'Exhibit Y' in support of asserted meetings but did not file or locate those exhibits in the record; the court found the referenced exhibits were absent.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited and quoted language attributed to Diaz v. Pan American World Airways, Inc. but provided an incorrect citation and the quoted language does not appear in the actual Diaz opinion; the court noted the citation error and that the case does not address pretext.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Villiarimo with an incorrect citation and attributed language not found in the actual Villiarimo decision; the court flagged the miscitation and misquotation.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Springer v. Boeing, 138 Wash. App. 248 (1997); the court was unable to locate the case and noted the citation does not appear in legal databases.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Bahrampour v. Lampert and attributed language and an employment-law proposition not present in that decision; the court noted the quotation/language does not appear in the cited opinion.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Levy v. Google LLC?
- The court issued a warning to the pro se plaintiff for citing nonexistent case law and misquoting authorities in his opposition brief. The court explicitly stated that such behavior is unacceptable and could lead to sanctions, despite the plaintiff's pro se status.
- Why does Levy v. Google LLC matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in W.D. Washington, with the listed outcome: Warning.
- What does the public record establish about Levy v. Google LLC?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Levy v. Google LLC 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.