Suday v. Suday
CA Texas · Jan 14, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Texas
- Record ID
- suday-v-suday-2026-01-14
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the trial court's order and issued a warning regarding the use of AI tools for legal research.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to the pro se litigant regarding the use of AI tools for legal research after discovering that nearly all citations in the appellant's supplemental brief were fictitious. The court declined to strike the brief, choosing instead to address the merits of the case.
Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Varela v. Varela, 464 S.W.3d 407 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2015, no pet.)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Garrison v. Garrison, 966 S.W.2d 493, 495 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Ex parte Hudson, 11 U.S. 225, 234 (1812)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Sabir v. Daud, No. 01-22-00956-CV, 2024 WL 3478110, at 5 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 18, 2024, no pet.)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Douglas v. Douglas, 454 S.W.2d 225, 227 (Tex. Civ. App.—Galveston 1970, no writ)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious. || Fabricated: Case Law | Supplemental brief cited 'Woodard v. Andrus, 419 S.W.3d 226, 234 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2013, pet. denied)', which court could not locate and deemed likely fictitious.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in CA Texas, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Family
- Appellate
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- unspecified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a county court order following a remand from the Supreme Court of Texas.
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 stated the litigant may have used an AI 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).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.