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 86/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Mundy v. Clickstop, Inc.
DC Nebraska · Oct 17, 2025
NE / stateEditorial impact: highfake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritybar referral
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent Nebraska case to support the discovery rule; court could not locate the authority. Outcome: Brief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Brief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- A $2K sanction plus bar referral starts with one unchecked Westlaw cite; require a signed verification cert on every brief.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent Nebraska case to support the discovery rule; court could not locate the authority. Outcome: Brief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral.
Operational lesson
A $2K sanction plus bar referral starts with one unchecked Westlaw cite; require a signed verification cert on every brief.
Record details
NebraskaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtDC Nebraska
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit8th Circuit
DateOct 17, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeBrief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral
Known amount$2,000
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Brief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
8 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent Nebraska case to support the discovery rule; court could not locate the authority.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent Nebraska decision regarding notice and commercial breach; court could not locate the authority.
- Misrepresented: Doctrinal Work | Plaintiff cited a Restatement provision with wording the court found to be hallucinated / inaccurate compared to the official Restatement text.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff used an incorrect/invalid Westlaw citation for a Nebraska Supreme Court case (led to unrelated material); the correct citation differs.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a Nebraska case that appears not to exist to support spoliation sanctions.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a proposition to Stones v. Sears that the case does not contain; the pincite actually addresses Magnuson‑Moss issues.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff relied on Lewy for the discovery rule and future-performance proposition though the 8th Cir. opinion does not stand for that proposition.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff presented a sentence as a direct quote from the Levi Strauss order though it was a paraphrase; formatting error presented it as verbatim quotation.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Mundy v. Clickstop, Inc.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent Nebraska case to support the discovery rule; court could not locate the authority. Outcome: Brief struck; Cert requirement; Monetary sanction; Bar Referral.
- Why does Mundy v. Clickstop, Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
- A $2K sanction plus bar referral starts with one unchecked Westlaw cite; require a signed verification cert on every brief.
- What does the public record establish about Mundy v. Clickstop, Inc.?
- 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 Mundy v. Clickstop, Inc. 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.