Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-05218VCGenerated September 10, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Ordinanza n. 789-1/2025 RGAC

C.A. Messina · Jan 9, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
C.A. Messina
Record ID
ordinanza-n-789-1-2025-rgac-2026-01-09
Observed outcome
The court rejected the appellant's request to suspend the provisional execution of the first-instance judgment.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The appellant alleged that the trial judge engaged in 'copy-paste' judicial writing by reproducing content from an online article and citing erroneous case law. The appellate court did not adjudicate the truth of these allegations, instead denying the appellant's request for a stay of execution because the underlying merits required further review.

Why the decision-maker cared

Misrepresented: Doctrinal Work | Alleged verbatim reproduction of substantial passages from an IUSLETTER article titled "Il contratto parla chiaro: sei un coobbligato" (16.12.2024) in the first-instance judgment; appellant contended judge copied text without autonomous reasoning. || Misrepresented: Case Law | First-instance judgment cited a Corte d'Appello di Venezia decision as "Sent. n. 2065/2023 del 19.10.2023" for co-obligation doctrine; appellant's check found the named decision exists but with a different date (5 June 2025) and different subject-matter. || Misrepresented: Case Law | First-instance judgment invoked Cass. civ. n. 1548/2023 on the concept of dolo; appellant contended that that Supreme Court decision is inconferent to the matter addressed by the trial judge.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Judge filing issue in C.A. Messina, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Hallucination_of_case_law
  • Misrepresentation_of_authority
  • Lack_of_autonomous_reasoning
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Trial
  • None Adjudicated
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Interlocutory proceeding regarding a request for suspension of provisional execution (inibitoria) pending appeal.
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 appellant alleged the judge copied text from an online article, implying the use of an unspecified AI or digital tool.

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. Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.