Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 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 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al.
C.D. California · Apr 3, 2026
CA / federalEditorial impact: mediumfake citationscivil rightstrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited a purported Ninth Circuit case 'Mabee v. County of Orange, 784 F. App'x 585, 588 (9th Cir. 2019)'; the court found no such case and that the reporter/pincite instead corresponds to Cochran v. City of Wichita (10th Cir.). Court ordered counsel to produce the Mabee opinion or show cause. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Order to Show Cause; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Check reporter citations against the actual case name; pincite-only matching is how fabricated cites hide in plain sight.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited a purported Ninth Circuit case 'Mabee v. County of Orange, 784 F. App'x 585, 588 (9th Cir. 2019)'; the court found no such case and that the reporter/pincite instead corresponds to Cochran v. City of Wichita (10th Cir.). Court ordered counsel to produce the Mabee opinion or show cause. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
Operational lesson
Check reporter citations against the actual case name; pincite-only matching is how fabricated cites hide in plain sight.
Record details
CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtC.D. California
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateApr 3, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeOrder to Show Cause
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
Order to Show Cause
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited a purported Ninth Circuit case 'Mabee v. County of Orange, 784 F. App'x 585, 588 (9th Cir. 2019)'; the court found no such case and that the reporter/pincite instead corresponds to Cochran v. City of Wichita (10th Cir.). Court ordered counsel to produce the Mabee opinion or show cause.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited a purported Ninth Circuit case 'Mabee v. County of Orange, 784 F. App'x 585, 588 (9th Cir. 2019)'; the court found no such case and that the reporter/pincite instead corresponds to Cochran v. City of Wichita (10th Cir.). Court ordered counsel to produce the Mabee opinion or show cause. Outcome: Order to Show Cause.
- Why does Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- Check reporter citations against the actual case name; pincite-only matching is how fabricated cites hide in plain sight.
- What does the public record establish about Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al.?
- 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 Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al. 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.