Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0RCI4XXGenerated October 26, 2026Evidence checked Oct 25, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Rosa Maria Cabrera Thompson v. Seattle Public Schools

W.D. Washington · Mar 31, 2026

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
W.D. Washington
Record ID
rosa-maria-cabrera-thompson-v-seattle-public-schools-2026-03-31
Observed outcome
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to amend and issued an order to show cause regarding sanctions for fabricated citations.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court ordered the pro se plaintiff to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for her continued citation of non-existent legal authority, noting that the plaintiff had previously been cautioned against this practice.

Why the decision-maker cared

The court reasoned that the plaintiff's continued reliance on nonexistent legal authority, despite prior warnings, necessitated a show-cause order to determine if sanctions are appropriate.

Why it matters now

Docket-number mismatches are an instant tell — courts pull the record and issue show-cause the same day.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Employment
  • Trial
  • Ordered To Show Cause
AI attribution
Not Established
Recorded tool
No tool named in source
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Order on Motion to Amend, including an Order to Show Cause regarding sanctions.
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.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Implement automated verification of all case citations and docket numbers against official court databases before filing.
  2. Establish a review protocol for pro se filings to identify and correct potential citation errors before they reach the court.
  3. Monitor docket entries for judicial warnings regarding research accuracy to prevent escalation to sanction proceedings.