Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-066MOB5Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Polanco v. Brooklyn Rose LLC

SC New York · Jun 16, 2026 · Devin P. Cohen

Jurisdiction
state
Court
SC New York
Record ID
polanco-v-brooklyn-rose-llc-2026-06-16
Observed outcome
Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment granted; sanctions hearing scheduled.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court scheduled a sanctions hearing to investigate defense counsel's submission of approximately 24 problematic citations, including 14 fabricated or unlocatable cases and 10 misrepresented authorities, which were identified in the defendant's opposition to a summary judgment motion.

Why the decision-maker cared

The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Defense papers cited this case but court could not locate the citation or match the caption..

Why it matters now

The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fabricated_case_law
  • Misrepresented_case_law
  • Fake Citations
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Tort
  • Trial
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Summary judgment granted for plaintiff; sanctions hearing scheduled.
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 noted the citations were likely generated by AI tools.

Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
  2. Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
  3. Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.