Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Prisbrey v. Prisbrey
CA Utah · Mar 19, 2026
UT / stateEditorial impact: lowfake citationsmisrepresented authorityfamilyappellate
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellate brief included multiple incorrect or nonexistent Utah case citations; the court found four of six cited authorities incorrect and said some citations "appear to be made out of whole cloth."
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- If only one of seven citations in an argument section is correct, expect published criticism; verify before filing, not after challenge.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellate brief included multiple incorrect or nonexistent Utah case citations; the court found four of six cited authorities incorrect and said some citations "appear to be made out of whole cloth."
Operational lesson
If only one of seven citations in an argument section is correct, expect published criticism; verify before filing, not after challenge.
Record details
UtahSingle-state evidence scope
CourtCA Utah
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit10th Circuit
DateMar 19, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeSee source
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
Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellate brief included multiple incorrect or nonexistent Utah case citations; the court found four of six cited authorities incorrect and said some citations "appear to be made out of whole cloth."
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Argument section contained several incorrect citations (wrong case names, unrelated authority, incorrect paragraph cites); only one of seven citations in that section was correct according to the court.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Prisbrey v. Prisbrey?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellate brief included multiple incorrect or nonexistent Utah case citations; the court found four of six cited authorities incorrect and said some citations "appear to be made out of whole cloth."
- Why does Prisbrey v. Prisbrey matter for legal AI risk?
- If only one of seven citations in an argument section is correct, expect published criticism; verify before filing, not after challenge.
- What does the public record establish about Prisbrey v. Prisbrey?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this Prisbrey v. Prisbrey 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.