Stance Strong and Kinisha Strong v. Zubha Pop Foods LLC d/b/a Popeyes Chicken
CA Illinois (1d) · Apr 15, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Illinois (1d)
- Record ID
- stance-strong-and-kinisha-strong-v-zubha-pop-foods-llc-dba-popeyes-chicken-2026-
- Observed outcome
- The appellate court struck the plaintiffs' opening and reply briefs and dismissed the appeal for failure to comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court struck the plaintiffs' briefs and dismissed the appeal because the filings contained numerous hallucinated case citations and failed to comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341 regarding well-reasoned arguments and accurate authority. The court determined that the plaintiffs' persistent reliance on fictitious AI-generated content rendered the appeal impossible to review.
The court reasoned that pro se litigants are presumed to have knowledge of supreme court rules and must comply with them. It determined that the sheer volume of fake cases (over twenty) and the failure to respond to sanctions motions necessitated striking the briefs and dismissing the appeal to preserve court resources and maintain the integrity of the adversary system.
This case illustrates that courts will not grant leniency to pro se litigants who use AI to generate filings containing fictitious authority. It reinforces the necessity of verifying all citations and ensuring that AI-assisted research is grounded in actual, existing legal precedent.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Tort
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- Centient AI
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and the striking of the plaintiffs' briefs.
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 noted the inclusion of hyperlinks and references to Centient AI.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to Centient AI output as to any other research input.