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 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Sharei Torah v. Hendel
SC New York · Jun 1, 2026
NY / stateEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authority
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent case caption and citation; court could not find any case titled 'Ennis v. Lessing' at the cited reporter. Outcome: Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order in SC New York, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent case caption and citation; court could not find any case titled 'Ennis v. Lessing' at the cited reporter. Outcome: Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order in SC New York, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
New YorkSingle-state evidence scope
CourtSC New York
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit2nd Circuit
DateJun 1, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeBrief Struck; Adverse Costs Order
Known amount$1
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
Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent case caption and citation; court could not find any case titled 'Ennis v. Lessing' at the cited reporter.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed a non-existent holding/quote to Mullane; the quoted language does not appear in the Mullane opinion at the cited pin cite.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Overstated and mischaracterized the holding of Waco by asserting state court proceedings are 'void' after removal; the court found the offered pin cite and characterization inaccurate.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Misstated the Things Remembered holding to suggest only a federal court may determine procedural defects in removal; the pin cite did not support that sweeping proposition.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Referenced a 'Standing Order of Reference' (12 Misc. 00032) and an involuntary bankruptcy petition but provided no supporting court order or petition; the court found these documentary assertions unsupported/absent from the filing.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Sharei Torah v. Hendel?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent case caption and citation; court could not find any case titled 'Ennis v. Lessing' at the cited reporter. Outcome: Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order.
- Why does Sharei Torah v. Hendel matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Brief Struck; Adverse Costs Order in SC New York, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Sharei Torah v. Hendel?
- 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 Sharei Torah v. Hendel 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.