Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0G1QO1SGenerated August 9, 2026Evidence checked Aug 9, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Mandy Pecher v Josef Gregor Habscheid,

Michigan CC · Jun 2, 2025

Jurisdiction
state
Court
Michigan CC
Record ID
mandy-pecher-v-josef-gregor-habscheid-2025-06-02
Observed outcome
Monetary Sanction; Motions denied
Known monetary consequence
$800
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Fabricated: Case Law | Multiple fabricated Michigan Court of Appeals unpublished opinions cited in May 9 and May 20 motions; court found the listed opinions do not exist and attributed their creation to ChatGPT. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Motions denied. As recounted in a subsequent complaint by the Grievance Administrator.

Why the decision-maker cared

The structured public record identifies fake citations and fabricated quotes and records Monetary Sanction; Motions denied. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.

Why it matters now

This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with Monetary Sanction; Motions denied in Michigan CC. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Fabricated Quotes
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Published Opinion
  • Trial
  • Monetary
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
ChatGPT
Known monetary consequence
$800
Procedural posture
Monetary Sanction; Motions denied
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases Database

Source link missing. No source URL is recorded.

No public source link is currently recorded.

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

ChatGPT is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. No underlying public source link is currently recorded. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
  3. Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
  4. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.