Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Jul 29, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 27, 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 81/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc.
CA 10th Cir. · Jul 27, 2026
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Opening Brief included a citation to a legal authority that does not exist (nonexistent authority cited in Op. Br. at 39); court assumed AI use produced the fabricated citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies fake citations and fabricated quotes and records Admonishment. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with Admonishment in CA 10th Cir.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Opening Brief included a citation to a legal authority that does not exist (nonexistent authority cited in Op. Br. at 39); court assumed AI use produced the fabricated citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
Operational lesson
This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with Admonishment in CA 10th Cir.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
CourtCA 10th Cir.
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit10th Circuit
DateJul 27, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeAdmonishment
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
reported
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Procedural posture
Admonishment
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Opening Brief included a citation to a legal authority that does not exist (nonexistent authority cited in Op. Br. at 39); court assumed AI use produced the fabricated citation.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Opening Brief characterized two existing cases in manners unsupported by their texts (misstatements/false attributions noted at Op. Br. 43, 45).
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Opening Brief included a citation to a legal authority that does not exist (nonexistent authority cited in Op. Br. at 39); court assumed AI use produced the fabricated citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why does Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with Admonishment in CA 10th Cir.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc.?
- 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 Lichfield v. Kubler; Netflix, Inc. 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.