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

Villasenor v. Ralphs Grocery Co.

California SC · Oct 28, 2025

Jurisdiction
state
Court
California SC
Record ID
villasenor-v-ralphs-grocery-co-2025-10-28
Observed outcome
The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding no triable issue of material fact regarding the plaintiff's claims.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court identified a fabricated case citation ('Bilo v. Dept. of Defense') in the plaintiff's opposition brief, attributing the error to AI tools used by counsel. The court formally noted the hallucination in its ruling, refused to consider the non-existent authority, and proceeded to grant the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the merits.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff's opposition cited 'Bilo v. Dept. of Defense (D. Haw. 2010) 720 F. Supp. 2d 1267'; the Court determined this case does not exist and refused to treat it as supporting authority.

Why it matters now

This record documents a Lawyer filing issue in California SC, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Employment
  • Trial
  • None Adjudicated
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
Unidentified
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Trial court ruling on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication.
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 noted the citation was likely generated by AI tools.

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.