Lunday v. Lunday
SC North Dakota · Oct 15, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- State
- Court
- SC North Dakota
- Record ID
- lunday-v-lunday-2026-10-15
- Observed outcome
- Double Costs
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited a fictitious or nonexistent case in his initial brief; the court identified six of the seven case citations in that brief as fictitious or otherwise erroneous and treated the defects as violations of the appellate briefing rules. Outcome: Double Costs.
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Double Costs. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Double Costs in SC North Dakota. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Other
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- No tool named in source
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Double Costs
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 current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
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.
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.