Solomon A. Jones v. Kankakee County Sheriff's Department, et al.
7th Cir. CA · Jan 21, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- 7th Cir. CA
- Record ID
- solomon-a-jones-v-kankakee-county-sheriffs-department-et-al-2026-01-21
- Observed outcome
- The court issued a warning regarding the accuracy of filings but declined to impose sanctions.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Seventh Circuit issued a warning to a pro se litigant after identifying non-existent quotations in an appellate brief that appeared to be AI-generated. The court declined to impose sanctions, concluding the errors were not intentional and that the litigant lacked the training to verify the citations.
False Quotes: Case Law | Appellant's reply brief attributed a quotation to a reported case, but the court found the quoted language does not appear in that case and described it as a non-existent quotation suggestive of an AI hallucination. || False Quotes: Case Law | A second attributed quotation in the reply brief likewise does not appear in the cited authority; the court flagged both misattributions when ordering a response but did not find intentional misconduct.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in 7th Cir. CA, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fabricated Quotes
- Civil Rights
- Appellate
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- Generative AI application (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a district court's stay order; the Seventh Circuit vacated the stay and remanded for further proceedings.
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 identified the errors as hallmarks of a generative AI application.
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
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.