HomeCasesLowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)

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.

Corpus matter record

Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)

D. New Mexico · Nov 5, 2025

NM / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authority

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Creekmore v. Food Lion, Inc., asserting it supports a rule about incomplete state-court records invalidating removal; the Court found that Creekmore does not support that proposition and Plaintiff misrepresented its holding. Outcome: Warning.

Why the court cared: Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Creekmore v. Food Lion, Inc., asserting it supports a rule about incomplete state-court records invalidating removal; the Court found that Creekmore does not support that proposition and Plaintiff misrepresented its holding. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Cornell v. Precision Valve & Automation, Inc., 2011 WL 1420182 (D.N.M. 2011)' repeatedly; the Court was unable to find the case and concluded it is fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on 'Baldwin v. Perdue Farms, Inc., 569 F. Supp. 2d 754 (E.D. Va. 2008)'; the Court could not locate this authority and concluded it is nonexistent. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted and over-extended a portion of Getty Oil's footnote and represented it as binding Tenth Circuit law; the Court found this characterization misleading. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a non-existent quoted holding to Cornwall v. Robinson and represented it as Tenth Circuit precedent; the Court noted the quoted language does not appear in Cornwall and the issue was not decided there. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited several Supreme Court and circuit opinions (e.g., Martin v. Franklin Capital, Carnegie-Mellon, Gibbs, Merrell Dow, Steel Co.) and misapplied or overstated their holdings for the proposition that removal should be invalidated here; the Court found those characterizations misleading.
Why it matters now: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. New Mexico, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. New Mexico, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Record details

New MexicoSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtD. New Mexico

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit10th Circuit

DateNov 5, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

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

Warning

Correction behavior

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.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Creekmore v. Food Lion, Inc., asserting it supports a rule about incomplete state-court records invalidating removal; the Court found that Creekmore does not support that proposition and Plaintiff misrepresented its holding.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Cornell v. Precision Valve & Automation, Inc., 2011 WL 1420182 (D.N.M. 2011)' repeatedly; the Court was unable to find the case and concluded it is fictitious.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on 'Baldwin v. Perdue Farms, Inc., 569 F. Supp. 2d 754 (E.D. Va. 2008)'; the Court could not locate this authority and concluded it is nonexistent.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted and over-extended a portion of Getty Oil's footnote and represented it as binding Tenth Circuit law; the Court found this characterization misleading.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a non-existent quoted holding to Cornwall v. Robinson and represented it as Tenth Circuit precedent; the Court noted the quoted language does not appear in Cornwall and the issue was not decided there.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited several Supreme Court and circuit opinions (e.g., Martin v. Franklin Capital, Carnegie-Mellon, Gibbs, Merrell Dow, Steel Co.) and misapplied or overstated their holdings for the proposition that removal should be invalidated here; the Court found those characterizations misleading.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)?: Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Creekmore v. Food Lion, Inc., asserting it supports a rule about incomplete state-court records invalidating removal; the Court found that Creekmore does not support that proposition and Plaintiff misrepresented its holding. Outcome: Warning.
Why does Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1) matter for legal AI risk?: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. New Mexico, with the listed outcome: Warning.
What does the public record establish about Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)?: 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 Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1) 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.

Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, IncD. New Mexico · May 26, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (2)D. New Mexico · May 21, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Lipe v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1)D. New Mexico · Sep 22, 2025same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Clifford Robert Cummings v. The Estate of Forrest FennD. New Mexico · Oct 30, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Lipe v. Albuquerque Public Schools (2)D. New Mexico · Oct 8, 2025same court · fake citations + misrepresented authority Tomlin v. State of New MexicoD. New Mexico · Feb 1, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. New Mexico, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Record details

New MexicoSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtD. New Mexico

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit10th Circuit

DateNov 5, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

6 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Cornell v. Precision Valve & Automation, Inc., 2011 WL 1420182 (D.N.M. 2011)' repeatedly; the Court was unable to find the case and concluded it is fictitious.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on 'Baldwin v. Perdue Farms, Inc., 569 F. Supp. 2d 754 (E.D. Va. 2008)'; the Court could not locate this authority and concluded it is nonexistent.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted and over-extended a portion of Getty Oil's footnote and represented it as binding Tenth Circuit law; the Court found this characterization misleading.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a non-existent quoted holding to Cornwall v. Robinson and represented it as Tenth Circuit precedent; the Court noted the quoted language does not appear in Cornwall and the issue was not decided there.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited several Supreme Court and circuit opinions (e.g., Martin v. Franklin Capital, Carnegie-Mellon, Gibbs, Merrell Dow, Steel Co.) and misapplied or overstated their holdings for the proposition that removal should be invalidated here; the Court found those characterizations misleading.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)?

Why does Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1) matter for legal AI risk?

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. New Mexico, with the listed outcome: Warning.

What does the public record establish about Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)?

Which source supports this Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1) 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.