HomeCasesRingo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 86/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC

CA Oregon · Dec 3, 2025

OR / stateEditorial impact: mediumfake citationsfabricated quotescontractappellate

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Brief struck.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | One of two fabricated case citations included in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. || False Quotes: Case Law | A substantive statement of law attributed to an existing case was fabricated (a false quotation/attribution); court found the attribution and statement to be nonexistent or false.
Why it matters now: Two fabricated citations in a single appellate brief triggered a $2K sanction — verify every case against Westlaw before filing.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Brief struck.

Operational lesson

Two fabricated citations in a single appellate brief triggered a $2K sanction — verify every case against Westlaw before filing.

Record details

OregonSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCA Oregon

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit9th Circuit

DateDec 3, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeMonetary Sanction; Brief struck

Known amount$2,000

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

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

Procedural posture

Monetary Sanction; Brief struck

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist.
Fabricated: Case Law | One of two fabricated case citations included in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist.
False Quotes: Case Law | A substantive statement of law attributed to an existing case was fabricated (a false quotation/attribution); court found the attribution and statement to be nonexistent or false.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC?: Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Brief struck.
Why does Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC matter for legal AI risk?: Two fabricated citations in a single appellate brief triggered a $2K sanction — verify every case against Westlaw before filing.
What does the public record establish about Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC?: 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 Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC 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.

Carol L. Williams v. Tracy HonlCA Oregon · Apr 22, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Doiban v. Oregon Liquor and Cannabis CommissionCA Oregon · Mar 18, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Keith Powell v. Employment Dep. & First Congregational Church of PortlandCA Oregon · Feb 11, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes State v. DixonCA Oregon · Jul 15, 2026same court · fake citations + appellate Boersma v. DavenportCA Oregon · May 6, 2026same court · fake citations + appellate Kelly Bartholomew v. Public Utility Commission of OregonCA Oregon · Apr 6, 2026same court · fake citations + appellate

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Brief struck.

Operational lesson

Two fabricated citations in a single appellate brief triggered a $2K sanction — verify every case against Westlaw before filing.

Record details

OregonSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCA Oregon

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit9th Circuit

DateDec 3, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeMonetary Sanction; Brief struck

Known amount$2,000

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist.

Fabricated: Case Law | One of two fabricated case citations included in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist.

False Quotes: Case Law | A substantive statement of law attributed to an existing case was fabricated (a false quotation/attribution); court found the attribution and statement to be nonexistent or false.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC?

Fabricated: Case Law | Second fabricated case citation in respondents' brief; court determined the cited authority does not exist. Outcome: Monetary Sanction; Brief struck.

Why does Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC matter for legal AI risk?

Two fabricated citations in a single appellate brief triggered a $2K sanction — verify every case against Westlaw before filing.

What does the public record establish about Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC?

Which source supports this Ringo v. Colquhoun Design Studio, LLC 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.