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 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Robbins v. Martin Law Firm, P.L.
M.D. Florida · Jul 28, 2025
FL / federalEditorial impact: mediumfake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritytort
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent M.D. Fla. decision as Baker v. BDO Seidman, LLP; court notes plaintiff conceded the citation was incorrect and the real case was a non-binding N.D. Cal. decision not involving bankruptcy. Outcome: No monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is No monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Conceding fabricated citations avoids monetary sanctions but leaves a public warning on the record.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent M.D. Fla. decision as Baker v. BDO Seidman, LLP; court notes plaintiff conceded the citation was incorrect and the real case was a non-binding N.D. Cal. decision not involving bankruptcy. Outcome: No monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued.
Operational lesson
Conceding fabricated citations avoids monetary sanctions but leaves a public warning on the record.
Record details
FloridaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtM.D. Florida
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit11th Circuit
DateJul 28, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeNo monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
No monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent M.D. Fla. decision as Baker v. BDO Seidman, LLP; court notes plaintiff conceded the citation was incorrect and the real case was a non-binding N.D. Cal. decision not involving bankruptcy.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a sentence about remand promoting judicial economy and discouraging forum shopping to Republic Reader’s; the court found the quotation does not exist in the opinion.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff quoted Eastus as requiring courts to weigh in favor of remand in non-core state law proceedings; the court found the quotation does not exist and noted Eastus did not involve bankruptcy.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Kircher for the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction on the removing party; the court explained Kircher addressed appellate review of remand orders and footnote 12 was unrelated.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff asserted Hirsch reaffirmed that malpractice and fiduciary duty claims are generally non-core and belong in state court; the court noted plaintiff conceded this was inaccurate, with only state-law application being similar.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Robbins v. Martin Law Firm, P.L.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a non-existent M.D. Fla. decision as Baker v. BDO Seidman, LLP; court notes plaintiff conceded the citation was incorrect and the real case was a non-binding N.D. Cal. decision not involving bankruptcy. Outcome: No monetary sanctions imposed; warning issued.
- Why does Robbins v. Martin Law Firm, P.L. matter for legal AI risk?
- Conceding fabricated citations avoids monetary sanctions but leaves a public warning on the record.
- What does the public record establish about Robbins v. Martin Law Firm, P.L.?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Robbins v. Martin Law Firm, P.L. 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.