Ryan v. Perez
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
CA Florida (3d) · Sep 23, 2026
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | The initial brief contained at least ten nonexistent or miscited case citations, according to the appellee’s answer brief. The court found that the citations were inaccurate and that several did not support the legal propositions for which they were offered, but the opinion did not identify each citation individually. Outcome: Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4).
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4). The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4) in CA Florida (3d). It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | The initial brief contained at least ten nonexistent or miscited case citations, according to the appellee’s answer brief. The court found that the citations were inaccurate and that several did not support the legal propositions for which they were offered, but the opinion did not identify each citation individually. Outcome: Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4).
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4) in CA Florida (3d). It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
Corrected 2026-11-02: see the corrections log.
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4)
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 | The initial brief contained at least ten nonexistent or miscited case citations, according to the appellee’s answer brief. The court found that the citations were inaccurate and that several did not support the legal propositions for which they were offered, but the opinion did not identify each citation individually.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Ryan v. Perez?
- Fabricated: Case Law | The initial brief contained at least ten nonexistent or miscited case citations, according to the appellee’s answer brief. The court found that the citations were inaccurate and that several did not support the legal propositions for which they were offered, but the opinion did not identify each citation individually. Outcome: Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4).
- Why does Ryan v. Perez matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Warning: the court of appeals chose not to start a show-cause step given the unique circumstances and cautioned the appellant that any future failure to verify cited cases will be penalized (No. 3D25-1254, p. 4) in CA Florida (3d). It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Ryan v. Perez?
- 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 Ryan v. Perez 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.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.