Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0F4MLL0Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Reed v. Community Health Care

W.D. Washington · Jun 10, 2025

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
W.D. Washington
Record ID
reed-v-community-health-care-2025-06-10
Observed outcome
Warning
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Outcome: Warning. " Plaintiffs identify fictitious quotes and citations in their briefing to support their arguments. For example, Plaintiffs purport to quote language from S.H. Hold v. United States, 853 F.3d 1056, 1064 (9th Cir. 2017) and Green v. United States, 630 F.3d 1245, 1249 (9th Cir. 2011). (Reed 2, Dkt. No. 23 at 6.) However, the quoted language is nowhere found in those cases. Plaintiffs also cite to a case identified as “Horne v. Potter, 557 F.3d 953, 957 (9th Cir. 2009).” (Id. at 7.) That citation, however, is for a case titled Bell v. The Hershey Company. Plaintiffs appear to acknowledge they offered fictitious citations. (See Reed 2, Dkt. No.…

Why the decision-maker cared

The linked record identifies pro se and trial and records Warning. This page does not infer judicial reasoning beyond the source.

Why it matters now

This matter connects pro se and trial involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in W.D. Washington, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Trial
  • Warning
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Warning
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

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: Metadata Only (medium confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Apply the same source-checking controls to AI (implied, unspecified) output as to any other research input.
  2. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.