Pletcher v. Village of Libertyville Police Pension Board
AC Illinois · Nov 24, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- AC Illinois
- Record ID
- pletcher-v-village-of-libertyville-police-pension-board-2025-11-24
- Observed outcome
- The appellate brief was stricken and the appeal was dismissed.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal and struck his appellate brief as a sanction for submitting fictitious case law, fabricated quotes, and non-existent record citations generated by artificial intelligence, in violation of Illinois Supreme Court rules.
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff cited non-existent record page numbers and referenced exhibits (A-F) that were never introduced into the administrative record; court noted these citations to the record do not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent case and quoted a favorable holding that does not exist; court found the case fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent case as authority for a rule on selective medical opinions; court found the citation fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent case claiming recognition of cumulative stress effects on cardiovascular health; court found citation fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent case to argue that a 14-month delay violated a statutory timeframe; court found the citation fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a nonexistent case on delay in issuing rulings; court found the case does not exist and plaintiff later conceded it was inapplicable. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a favorable holding to Bowlin that the case does not contain; court determined the quoted language is not in Bowlin. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted Johnson as stating inability to comply with treatment does not negate disability; court found Johnson does not support that statement. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted Knight as holding that persistence despite treatment does not infer non-compliance; court found Knight does not contain that language. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a broad rebuke of selective expert reliance to Roszak that the case does not support; court found the quote misleading. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff claimed Jones supports a finding about shift work and cardiovascular harm; court found Jones does not address hypertension or related conditions. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a genetics-related holding to Johnston that the case does not contain; court found the quoted language absent from Johnston.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in AC Illinois, with the listed outcome: Plaintiff's appellate brief stricken and appeal dismissed.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Administrative
- Trial
- Case Dismissed
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of an administrative pension board decision, where the defendant moved for sanctions under Illinois Supreme Court Rules 375(a) and 375(b) following the submission of an AI-generated brief.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court noted the brief was created with the aid of artificial intelligence.
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).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.