Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Rivard v. Dept. of Corrections
Vermont SC · Dec 10, 2025
VT / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authoritycriminal
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's brief cites a non-existent Vermont decision 'Paige v. State, 2023 VT 66, ¶ 17'; the court found no such citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's brief cites a non-existent Vermont decision 'Paige v. State, 2023 VT 66, ¶ 17'; the court found no such citation. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Petitioner cited 'State v. Benjamin, 173 Vt. 275, 279-80 (2001)', but the pin cite corresponds to State v. Garbutt, 173 Vt. 277, 279 (2001); the correct Benjamin decision addressing revocation is 2007 VT 52.
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Vermont SC, with the listed outcome: Admonishment.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's brief cites a non-existent Vermont decision 'Paige v. State, 2023 VT 66, ¶ 17'; the court found no such citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
Operational lesson
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Vermont SC, with the listed outcome: Admonishment.
Record details
VermontSingle-state evidence scope
CourtVermont SC
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit2nd Circuit
DateDec 10, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeAdmonishment
Known amountNot recorded
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
Admonishment
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's brief cites a non-existent Vermont decision 'Paige v. State, 2023 VT 66, ¶ 17'; the court found no such citation.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Petitioner cited 'State v. Benjamin, 173 Vt. 275, 279-80 (2001)', but the pin cite corresponds to State v. Garbutt, 173 Vt. 277, 279 (2001); the correct Benjamin decision addressing revocation is 2007 VT 52.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Rivard v. Dept. of Corrections?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's brief cites a non-existent Vermont decision 'Paige v. State, 2023 VT 66, ¶ 17'; the court found no such citation. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why does Rivard v. Dept. of Corrections matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Vermont SC, with the listed outcome: Admonishment.
- What does the public record establish about Rivard v. Dept. of Corrections?
- 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 Rivard v. Dept. of Corrections 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.