Samantha Roussell v. The Bank of New York Mellon
CA Florida · Mar 11, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Florida
- Record ID
- samantha-roussell-v-the-bank-of-new-york-mellon-2026-03-11
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the lower court's decision and issued a warning regarding the appellant's briefing conduct, declining to impose formal sanctions.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to a pro se litigant after identifying thirteen fabricated cases and nine misrepresented cases in an appellate brief. While the court noted its authority to impose sanctions under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410(a), it ultimately declined to sanction the appellant in this specific matter.
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Appellant's brief cited thirteen cases that do not exist; the court expressly disregarded these fabricated cases..
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a state proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated_case_law
- Misrepresented_case_law
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Contract
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- artificial intelligence
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a circuit court decision; the court affirmed the lower court's decision on the merits while issuing a warning regarding the appellant's briefing conduct.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court explicitly referenced the use of artificial intelligence in brief preparation.
Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
- Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
- Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.