Stephen J. Palumbo and Lori A. Palumbo v. Gregory M. Palumbo
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0), which credits Jesse Schaefer; document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
Delaware Ch. · Aug 10, 2026
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent quoted language he attributed to Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings that the court found does not appear in that decision; court described the fabricated quotation as a hallmark of AI usage and used it as evidence of bad faith. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Adverse Costs Order. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in Delaware Ch.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent quoted language he attributed to Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings that the court found does not appear in that decision; court described the fabricated quotation as a hallmark of AI usage and used it as evidence of bad faith. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in Delaware Ch.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Adverse Costs Order
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent quoted language he attributed to Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings that the court found does not appear in that decision; court described the fabricated quotation as a hallmark of AI usage and used it as evidence of bad faith.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent attributed a Rule 12(e) procedural principle to Koninklijke v. Philips that the court found the cited case does not support; the court treated the miscitation as another indicium of fabricated authority.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Stephen J. Palumbo and Lori A. Palumbo v. Gregory M. Palumbo?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent quoted language he attributed to Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings that the court found does not appear in that decision; court described the fabricated quotation as a hallmark of AI usage and used it as evidence of bad faith. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why does Stephen J. Palumbo and Lori A. Palumbo v. Gregory M. Palumbo matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in Delaware Ch.. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Stephen J. Palumbo and Lori A. Palumbo v. Gregory M. Palumbo?
- 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 Stephen J. Palumbo and Lori A. Palumbo v. Gregory M. Palumbo 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.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.