Rebecca Jean v. Seattle Credit Union
W.D. Washington · Jul 15, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- W.D. Washington
- Record ID
- rebecca-jean-v-seattle-credit-union-2026-07-15
- Observed outcome
- The court struck the plaintiff's response brief and imposed a mandatory declaration requirement for all future filings regarding AI usage and citation verification.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court struck the plaintiff's response brief due to the inclusion of nonexistent legal authority and fabricated quotations. It issued a severe warning, requiring the plaintiff to provide a sworn declaration in all future filings and correspondence disclosing any use of generative AI, identifying the specific tool used, and certifying the verification of all legal citations and factual assertions.
The court found the plaintiff's explanations regarding the nonexistent authority not credible and determined that the plaintiff's prior disclosure regarding AI usage was insufficient to meet the court's expectations for transparency and verification.
This case illustrates judicial enforcement of strict verification standards for pro se litigants using generative AI. It establishes a clear procedural precedent for requiring sworn declarations of AI usage and citation accuracy to prevent the submission of hallucinated legal authority.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Other
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court issued a Minute Order discharging an order to show cause, striking the plaintiff's response brief, and imposing ongoing procedural requirements for future filings.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court noted the plaintiff failed to identify the tool used.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Implement a mandatory verification protocol for all legal citations and quotations before filing.
- Require a sworn declaration disclosing the use of generative AI tools in the drafting process.
- Ensure all factual assertions are supported by adequate foundation and personal knowledge.
- Utilize standard software features for redlining to ensure accuracy in amended pleadings.