Stevenson v. Schultz (consolidated with Schultz v. Stevenson)
CA California (3d) · Nov 4, 2026
Short answer. Status: Admonishment; amount: no amount stated. CA California (3d), decision date on record November 4, 2026. As of November 13, 2026. Court source · Methodology
- Jurisdiction
- State
- Court
- CA California (3d)
- Record ID
- stevenson-v-schultz-consolidated-with-schultz-v-stevenson-2026-11-04
- Observed outcome
- Admonishment
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | Stevenson cited a nonexistent case for the proposition that a foreign divorce decree does not deprive California courts of jurisdiction over property division and support issues. The court stated that the case does not exist. Outcome: Admonishment.
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Admonishment. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Admonishment in CA California (3d). It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Family
- Appellate
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- No tool named in source
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Admonishment
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 current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
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.
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.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.