HomeCasesOffen Petroleum v. L&J Express

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.

Corpus matter record

Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express

D. Arizona · Feb 4, 2026

AZ / federalEditorial impact: lowfake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritycontract

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

While resolving motions to dismiss, the court noted that a motion cited a nonexistent case, included quotations not found in the cited decisions, and used citations that did not support the accompanying propositions; it issued a warning about possible Rule 11 consequences.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Motion cites a nonexistent case (case cited does not exist). || False Quotes: Case Law | Motion contains quoted materials that do not appear in the cases cited (quotes attributed to cited cases are not in those opinions). || Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion includes case citations that do not support the explanatory phrase presented alongside the citation (misstates the holdings/support).
Why it matters now: Treat AI-drafted motions as untrusted first drafts; verify cites and quotes against the actual opinions.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Treat AI-drafted motions as untrusted first drafts; verify cites and quotes against the actual opinions.

Record details

ArizonaSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtD. Arizona

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit9th Circuit

DateFeb 4, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeWarning

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

Warning

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Motion cites a nonexistent case (case cited does not exist).
False Quotes: Case Law | Motion contains quoted materials that do not appear in the cases cited (quotes attributed to cited cases are not in those opinions).
Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion includes case citations that do not support the explanatory phrase presented alongside the citation (misstates the holdings/support).

Questions this record answers

What happened in Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express?: While resolving motions to dismiss, the court noted that a motion cited a nonexistent case, included quotations not found in the cited decisions, and used citations that did not support the accompanying propositions; it issued a warning about possible Rule 11 consequences.
Why does Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express matter for legal AI risk?: Treat AI-drafted motions as untrusted first drafts; verify cites and quotes against the actual opinions.
What does the public record establish about Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express?: 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.
Which source supports this Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express 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.

Wireless Investors LLC v. Semtech Incorporated, et al.D. Arizona · Dec 18, 2025same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Perry v. Exeter Finance LLCD. Arizona · Feb 26, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Gerow v. FalconeD. Arizona · Feb 20, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Mavy v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationD. Arizona · Jan 13, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Robert Cole Stemkowski Goldman v. Arizona Board of RegentsD. Arizona · Oct 29, 2025same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Thompson v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationD. Arizona · Sep 5, 2025same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Treat AI-drafted motions as untrusted first drafts; verify cites and quotes against the actual opinions.

Tracked discrepancy record

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Motion cites a nonexistent case (case cited does not exist).

False Quotes: Case Law | Motion contains quoted materials that do not appear in the cases cited (quotes attributed to cited cases are not in those opinions).

Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion includes case citations that do not support the explanatory phrase presented alongside the citation (misstates the holdings/support).

Questions this record answers

What happened in Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express?

Why does Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express matter for legal AI risk?

Treat AI-drafted motions as untrusted first drafts; verify cites and quotes against the actual opinions.

What does the public record establish about Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express?

Which source supports this Offen Petroleum v. L&J Express 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.