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 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Prososki v. Regan
SC Nebraska · Mar 20, 2026
NE / stateEditorial impact: career endingfake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritybar referral
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cites 'Miller v. Miller, 227 Neb. 71, 416 N.W.2d 358 (1987)' and attributes quotations/holdings that the court determined are fictitious; the citation refers to a nonexistent authority as used. Outcome: Appellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension. The suspension was later reported by local media (see, e.g., here).
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Appellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Fabricated citations in a state-supreme-court brief end appeals and trigger bar referral; verify every cite against the reporter.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cites 'Miller v. Miller, 227 Neb. 71, 416 N.W.2d 358 (1987)' and attributes quotations/holdings that the court determined are fictitious; the citation refers to a nonexistent authority as used. Outcome: Appellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension. The suspension was later reported by local media (see, e.g., here).
Operational lesson
Fabricated citations in a state-supreme-court brief end appeals and trigger bar referral; verify every cite against the reporter.
Record details
NebraskaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtSC Nebraska
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit8th Circuit
DateMar 20, 2026
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeAppellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionYes
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Appellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cites 'Miller v. Miller, 227 Neb. 71, 416 N.W.2d 358 (1987)' and attributes quotations/holdings that the court determined are fictitious; the citation refers to a nonexistent authority as used.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Brief attributes quotations and holdings to Bergmeier v. Bergmeier that do not appear in that opinion and misstates the case's holdings.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Brief repeatedly cited 'Kennedy v. Kennedy, 27 Neb. App. 510, 934 N.W.2d 57 (2019)' and included block quotations and holdings not present; the cited unreported memorandum opinion does not contain the quoted language or the purported holding.
- False Quotes: Legal Norm | Brief purports to quote Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2923 as stating a specific policy favoring frequent contact with both parents; the statute does not contain the quoted language and was misquoted.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Brief attributes a quoted principle about notice of issues to Simons v. Simons that does not appear in the opinion; the quoted language cannot be found in the case and the case does not support the proposition advanced.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Prososki v. Regan?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Brief cites 'Miller v. Miller, 227 Neb. 71, 416 N.W.2d 358 (1987)' and attributes quotations/holdings that the court determined are fictitious; the citation refers to a nonexistent authority as used. Outcome: Appellant's brief stricken; appellant's appeal dismissed; Bar referral; Suspension. The suspension was later reported by local media (see, e.g., here).
- Why does Prososki v. Regan matter for legal AI risk?
- Fabricated citations in a state-supreme-court brief end appeals and trigger bar referral; verify every cite against the reporter.
- What does the public record establish about Prososki v. Regan?
- 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 Prososki v. Regan 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.