Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1S5HTBUGenerated September 10, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Ng v. AmGuard Insurance Company, et al.

S.D. New York · Dec 29, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
S.D. New York
Record ID
ng-v-amguard-insurance-company-et-al-2025-12-29
Observed outcome
The Court granted the defendants' motions to vacate the Clerk's Certificates of Default and issued a formal warning to the plaintiff regarding the use of AI-generated fake citations.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The Court issued a formal warning to a pro se litigant for including a fabricated case citation in a court filing, which the Court attributed to the potential use of generative AI. The Judge warned that future submissions of nonexistent authorities could lead to sanctions, including dismissal.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Greyhound-Thermalink, Inc. v. B.U.R. Realty Corp., 42 A.D.3d 319, 320 (N.Y. 1st Dep’t 2007)', which the Court's research found does not appear to exist; Court warned about AI-generated fake citations.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in S.D. New York, with the listed outcome: Warning.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Tort
  • Trial
  • Warning
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
Generative AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Opinion and Order on motions to vacate Clerk’s Certificates of Default.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

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

The Court attributed the fake citation to ChatGPT or similar AI programs.

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).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.