Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-122SHSLGenerated August 17, 2026Evidence checked Aug 17, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Rodnei Chagas v. Fabricio Petinelli Vieira Coutinho

TJ Parana · Jun 6, 2025

Jurisdiction
international
Court
TJ Parana
Record ID
rodnei-chagas-v-fabricio-petinelli-vieira-coutinho-2025-06-06
Observed outcome
Monetary Fine
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant submitted multiple jurisprudential citations that could not be located and were deemed non-existent; court concluded they were created by an AI search tool. Outcome: Monetary Fine.

Why the decision-maker cared

The structured public record identifies fake citations and misrepresented authority and records Monetary Fine. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.

Why it matters now

This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Monetary Fine in TJ Parana. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Landlord Tenant
  • Trial
  • Monetary
AI attribution
Not Established
Recorded tool
Unidentified
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Monetary Fine
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

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

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.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
  3. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.