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 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al.
D. Kansas · Jan 16, 2026
KS / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsemploymenttrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated reference to Smith v. West Lake Enterprises, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (D. Kan. 2005) Outcome: Warning. While the court did not ascertained whether the plaintiff's brief contained any hallucination, Pelaikan identified at least two, as well as several misrepresentations: see the report here.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated reference to Smith v. West Lake Enterprises, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (D. Kan. 2005)
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Kansas, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated reference to Smith v. West Lake Enterprises, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (D. Kan. 2005) Outcome: Warning. While the court did not ascertained whether the plaintiff's brief contained any hallucination, Pelaikan identified at least two, as well as several misrepresentations: see the report here.
Operational lesson
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Kansas, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Record details
KansasSingle-state evidence scope
CourtD. Kansas
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit10th Circuit
DateJan 16, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeWarning
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
Warning
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated reference to Smith v. West Lake Enterprises, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (D. Kan. 2005)
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Fabricated reference to Smith v. West Lake Enterprises, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (D. Kan. 2005) Outcome: Warning. While the court did not ascertained whether the plaintiff's brief contained any hallucination, Pelaikan identified at least two, as well as several misrepresentations: see the report here.
- Why does Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Kansas, with the listed outcome: Warning.
- What does the public record establish about Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al.?
- 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 Robby Mendez v. City of Topeka, et al. 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.