Sidni Campbell v. John Campbell, Jr.
CA Texas · Jan 22, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Texas
- Record ID
- sidni-campbell-v-john-campbell-jr-2026-01-22
- Observed outcome
- The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and issued a formal warning regarding the litigant's use of fabricated legal authorities.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to a pro se litigant regarding the inclusion of fabricated case citations and phantom quotations in his motions. The court attributed these errors to the use of generative AI and cautioned that such conduct is serious and subject to potential future sanctions.
Fabricated: Case Law | Daren cited cases that do not appear to exist; court observed fabricated case citations in his motions. || False Quotes: Case Law | Daren cited purported quotations that do not exist in the relevant opinions; court noted misquoted or phantom quotations.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA Texas, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Other
- Appellate
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- generative AI
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Memorandum opinion issued by the Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin, dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction and addressing the conduct of a pro se litigant.
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 suggested the litigant used generative AI.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.