Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1PTLLFRGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Steven E. Hobbs, Sr. v. Igor Goncharko, et al. (2)

N.D. Illinois · Jan 16, 2026

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
N.D. Illinois
Record ID
steven-e-hobbs-sr-v-igor-goncharko-et-al-2-2026-01-16
Observed outcome
The court issued a warning to the plaintiff regarding the use of hallucinated citations and denied the Landlord Defendants' motion to dismiss, allowing the case to proceed.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court issued a formal warning to the pro se plaintiff regarding the inclusion of hallucinated and mis-cited case law in his filings. While the court declined to impose immediate sanctions, it explicitly cautioned that future submissions containing such errors could result in dismissal of the case with prejudice.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff twice cited a non-existent case Lathan v. Brinkerhoff; court identified it as fictitious and previously warned about it. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff mis-cited 'City of Chicago v. Matchmaker' (court treated it as an incorrect/fictitious citation in plaintiff's brief). || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Oconomowoc v. Greenfield,' a mis-citation distinct from the real Oconomowoc Residential Programs precedent referenced by the court. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Vargas v. Cook Cnty. Sheriff' in his brief; court listed it among the mis-citations in the response. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff invoked Bloch v. Frischholz for the proposition that statistical evidence is not required; court explained Bloch does not support that conclusion and was misrepresented.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Illinois, with the listed outcome: Warning.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Hallucinated_case_law
  • Misrepresented_legal_authority
  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Civil Rights
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Memorandum Opinion and Order on defendants' motions to dismiss the plaintiff's second amended complaint.
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 refers to the plaintiff's conduct as hallucinating citations.

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.
  2. Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.