Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City
10th Cir. CA · Dec 3, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The 10th Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the appellant's claims and, alternatively, dismissed the appeal as a sanction for the appellant's misuse of generative AI. The court ordered the appellant to disclose future GenAI use and verify the accuracy of all case citations under penalty of perjury in subsequent filings.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Eleven case citations in Moore's appellate brief could not be located on Westlaw; court concluded they appear fabricated and ordered Moore to produce copies or explain their origin. || Fabricated: Case Law | Moore cited 'Cohen v. United States, 201 F.3d 109'; court found this citation fabricated (the reporter page corresponds to Kalwasinski v. Morse, 201 F.3d 103) and treated it as an AI-generated hallucination. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore misrepresented Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006), claiming it supported a particular principle; court found the representation inaccurate and that the case did not state the proposition she attributed to it. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore cited Gilday v. Mecosta County, 124 F.3d 760 (6th Cir. 1997) as supporting 'equitable access principles'; court found Gilday does not contain or use that language or principle and deemed the citation mischaracterized.
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in 10th Cir. CA, with the listed outcome: District court judgment affirmed; alternatively appeal dismissed as a sanction for misuse of GenAI; Future disclosure of GenAI use and verification of citations ordered, under penalty of perjury..
Why this matter is tracked
In an appeal from a district court dismissal of employment discrimination claims, the 10th Circuit affirmed the lower court's judgment. Additionally, the court sanctioned the pro se appellant, Rashonna Moore, for the inclusion of eleven fabricated case citations and the misrepresentation of two actual cases in her appellate brief. The court concluded these errors resulted from the unscrutinized use of generative AI. As a sanction, the court dismissed the appeal in the alternative to its merits-based affirmance. The court further ordered that in all future filings, Moore must disclose any use of GenAI tools and verify under penalty of perjury that all cited authorities are accurate and exist, warning that non-compliant filings will be stricken.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in 10th Cir. CA, with the listed outcome: District court judgment affirmed; alternatively appeal dismissed as a sanction for misuse of GenAI; Future disclosure of GenAI use and verification of citations ordered, under penalty of perjury..
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The court identified the use of a GenAI tool as the source of the hallucinations.
Appellate review of a district court's Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of employment discrimination claims.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Eleven case citations in Moore's appellate brief could not be located on Westlaw; court concluded they appear fabricated and ordered Moore to produce copies or explain their origin.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Moore cited 'Cohen v. United States, 201 F.3d 109'; court found this citation fabricated (the reporter page corresponds to Kalwasinski v. Morse, 201 F.3d 103) and treated it as an AI-generated hallucination.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore misrepresented Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006), claiming it supported a particular principle; court found the representation inaccurate and that the case did not state the proposition she attributed to it.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Moore cited Gilday v. Mecosta County, 124 F.3d 760 (6th Cir. 1997) as supporting 'equitable access principles'; court found Gilday does not contain or use that language or principle and deemed the citation mischaracterized.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City?
- The 10th Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the appellant's claims and, alternatively, dismissed the appeal as a sanction for the appellant's misuse of generative AI. The court ordered the appellant to disclose future GenAI use and verify the accuracy of all case citations under penalty of perjury in subsequent filings.
- Why does Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in 10th Cir. CA, with the listed outcome: District court judgment affirmed; alternatively appeal dismissed as a sanction for misuse of GenAI; Future disclosure of GenAI use and verification of citations ordered, under penalty of perjury..
- What does the public record establish about Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Rashonna Moore v. City of Del City 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.