William McNae and Ronda McNae v. ARAG Insurance Company
W.D. Washington · Nov 13, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- W.D. Washington
- Record ID
- william-mcnae-and-ronda-mcnae-v-arag-insurance-company-2025-11-13
- Observed outcome
- The court struck the joint submission and ordered the plaintiffs to pay a $100 sanction to the defendant's counsel.
- Known monetary consequence
- $100
Why this matter warrants attention
The court struck the plaintiffs' joint discovery submission and imposed a $100 monetary sanction. The court determined that the plaintiffs included fabricated legal citations and made false representations to opposing counsel, which unnecessarily multiplied proceedings and obstructed the court's orderly administration of justice.
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Plaintiffs relied on a purported quotation from Local Civil Rule 1(c) claiming it "permits flexibility 'in the interest of justice'", but the rule contains no such language and the attribution was inaccurate. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs attributed the quotation "factual materials underlying an ERISA determination are discoverable" to Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Ins. Co.; the Court found the quotation does not appear in Abatie and could not be located via Westlaw/Google.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in W.D. Washington, with the listed outcome: Filing struck; monetary sanction.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Contract
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- $100
- Procedural posture
- The court granted the defendant's motion to strike the plaintiffs' joint discovery submission (ECF #93) and imposed monetary sanctions following a finding of bad faith conduct.
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 identified the use of fabricated citations and quotes, implying the use of generative AI.
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.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.
- Escalate and correct a suspect filing promptly, with a documented response.