Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-04RMGZ7Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

State ex rel. Soretha Marie Eldridge v. Judge Ashley Kilbane

CA Ohio · Oct 31, 2025

Jurisdiction
state
Court
CA Ohio
Record ID
state-ex-rel-soretha-marie-eldridge-v-judge-ashley-kilbane-2025-10-31
Observed outcome
The court dismissed the writs of mandamus and prohibition and ordered the relator to pay costs.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court dismissed the relator's writs of mandamus and prohibition after she admitted to including hallucinated cases in her petition. The court denied her request for leave to amend the petition and ordered her to pay costs.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA Ohio, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Civil Rights
  • Appellate
  • None Adjudicated
AI attribution
Admitted
Recorded tool
Unidentified
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
The Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, granted the respondent's motion to dismiss the relator's petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The court identified the source of the errors as artificial intelligence but did not name a specific tool.

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).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.