Mitchell Taylor Button & Dusty Button v. Sigrid McCawley
S.D. Florida · Feb 4, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- S.D. Florida
- Record ID
- mitchell-taylor-button-dusty-button-v-sigrid-mccawley-2026-02-04
- Observed outcome
- The court adopted the magistrate's report, awarded $11,740 in attorneys' fees, and ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for submitting fabricated citations.
- Known monetary consequence
- $11,740
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a show cause order requiring the pro se plaintiffs to justify their repeated use of fabricated legal citations and misrepresented record evidence. The plaintiffs must file a response by February 25, 2026, including a signed certification detailing their verification process for all legal and factual assertions to avoid further sanctions under Rule 11.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited In re: Marriage of Smith, 195 Cal. App. 4th 1007, 1018 (2011), which the court identified as a non-existent authority as presented. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs attributed the quotation "Dismissal based on a legal defense does not equate to frivolity." to Parekh; court found Parekh contains no such language. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs attributed a quotation about use of confidential information to In re Shell Oil Refinery; court found the quoted material is not in that case. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited Lopez v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 14-cv-2524, 2016 WL 4131149 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2016), which the court found does not exist as cited. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited Harris v. City of Auburn, 2018 WL 3329858 (M.D. Ala. July 6, 2018), which the court determined was a mis-citation (the cited decision did not exist as presented). || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited Avery v. Ward, 2014 WL 4748452, at *3 (S.D. Ala. Sept. 23, 2014), which the court found does not exist as cited. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs quoted language attributed to Schwartz v. Millon Air, Inc., 341 F.3d 1220, 1225 (11th Cir. 2003) that does not appear in that opinion; court found the quotation fabricated/misattributed. || Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiffs claimed the magistrate's R&R contained language calling them 'serial litigants' and accusing them of filing to 'harass' and being 'retaliatory'; the court found those characterizations do not appear in the R&R.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in S.D. Florida, with the listed outcome: Show Cause Order; Order to certify review of citations.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Contract
- Trial
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- $11,740
- Procedural posture
- Order adopting magistrate's report and recommendation, overruling objections, and issuing a show cause order regarding potential Rule 11 sanctions.
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 court noted the plaintiffs' frequent use of AI to generate hallucinated citations.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.
- Ensure required disclosures are accurate and timely.