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 80/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Sehra Waheed v. SM 1 MMS, LLC, et al.
S.D. New York · Oct 28, 2025
NY / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationscontracttrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Hughes v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, No. 3:20-cv-00670 (M.D. Tenn. June 11, 2021)'; the court was unable to locate the case in research databases and suggested it may be an AI-generated hallucination.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Hughes v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, No. 3:20-cv-00670 (M.D. Tenn. June 11, 2021)'; the court was unable to locate the case in research databases and suggested it may be an AI-generated hallucination.
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in S.D. New York, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Hughes v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, No. 3:20-cv-00670 (M.D. Tenn. June 11, 2021)'; the court was unable to locate the case in research databases and suggested it may be an AI-generated hallucination.
Operational lesson
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in S.D. New York, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
Record details
New YorkSingle-state evidence scope
CourtS.D. New York
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit2nd Circuit
DateOct 28, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
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
Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
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 | Plaintiff cited 'Hughes v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, No. 3:20-cv-00670 (M.D. Tenn. June 11, 2021)'; the court was unable to locate the case in research databases and suggested it may be an AI-generated hallucination.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Sehra Waheed v. SM 1 MMS, LLC, et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Hughes v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, No. 3:20-cv-00670 (M.D. Tenn. June 11, 2021)'; the court was unable to locate the case in research databases and suggested it may be an AI-generated hallucination.
- Why does Sehra Waheed v. SM 1 MMS, LLC, et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in S.D. New York, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
- What does the public record establish about Sehra Waheed v. SM 1 MMS, LLC, 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 Sehra Waheed v. SM 1 MMS, LLC, 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.