AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Oct 4, 2026 · Latest decision Oct 1, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesR. M. v. Mohr
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

R. M. v. Mohr

CA Oregon · Sep 23, 2026

OR / stateEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationsfamilyappellateMonetary
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The respondent cited three fabricated cases in his opening brief. The court did not identify the individual case names or citations in the decision, disregarded them and their purported support, and imposed a reduced sanction. Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Monetary Sanction. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Monetary Sanction in CA Oregon. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | The respondent cited three fabricated cases in his opening brief. The court did not identify the individual case names or citations in the decision, disregarded them and their purported support, and imposed a reduced sanction. Outcome: Monetary Sanction.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Monetary Sanction in CA Oregon. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

OregonSingle-state evidence scope
Explore OROpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtCA Oregon
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit9th Circuit
DateSep 23, 2026
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeMonetary Sanction
Known amount$250
Professional sanctionNo
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

Monetary Sanction

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | The respondent cited three fabricated cases in his opening brief. The court did not identify the individual case names or citations in the decision, disregarded them and their purported support, and imposed a reduced sanction.

Questions this record answers

What happened in R. M. v. Mohr?
Fabricated: Case Law | The respondent cited three fabricated cases in his opening brief. The court did not identify the individual case names or citations in the decision, disregarded them and their purported support, and imposed a reduced sanction. Outcome: Monetary Sanction.
Why does R. M. v. Mohr matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Monetary Sanction in CA Oregon. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about R. M. v. Mohr?
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 R. M. v. Mohr 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.

Kelly Bartholomew v. Public Utility Commission of OregonCA Oregon · Apr 6, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsKeith Powell v. Employment Dep. & First Congregational Church of PortlandCA Oregon · Feb 11, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsState v. DixonCA Oregon · Jul 15, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsBoersma v. DavenportCA Oregon · May 6, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsCarol L. Williams v. Tracy HonlCA Oregon · Apr 22, 2026same court · fake citations + appellateDoiban v. Oregon Liquor and Cannabis CommissionCA Oregon · Mar 18, 2026same court · fake citations + appellate