Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 9, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesWillie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Willie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District · Sep 1, 2026

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited three completely fictitious cases in his brief. One was cited five times, another twice, and the third once; the court found that the nonexistent authorities constituted spurious citations and a flagrant violation of the duty of candor. Outcome: Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.. The pro se appellant submitted an appellate brief containing three completely fictitious cases, inaccurate citations, irrelevant authorities, incorrect pin cites, and substantive misstatements of the holdings of cited cases. The court held that the pervasive deficiencies and reliance on nonexistent case law prevented meaningful appellate review and violated the applicable briefing and certification rules. The appeal was dismissed.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations. in Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited three completely fictitious cases in his brief. One was cited five times, another twice, and the third once; the court found that the nonexistent authorities constituted spurious citations and a flagrant violation of the duty of candor. Outcome: Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.. The pro se appellant submitted an appellate brief containing three completely fictitious cases, inaccurate citations, irrelevant authorities, incorrect pin cites, and substantive misstatements of the holdings of cited cases. The court held that the pervasive deficiencies and reliance on nonexistent case law prevented meaningful appellate review and violated the applicable briefing and certification rules. The appeal was dismissed.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations. in Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

MissouriSingle-state evidence scope
Explore MOOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit8th Circuit
DateSep 1, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeAppeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited three completely fictitious cases in his brief. One was cited five times, another twice, and the third once; the court found that the nonexistent authorities constituted spurious citations and a flagrant violation of the duty of candor.
  2. Misrepresented: Case Law | The appellant repeatedly cited real cases for propositions unrelated to the legal issues and substantively misstated the legal propositions stated in other cited cases. The court characterized these misrepresentations as an abuse of the judicial system.
  3. Misrepresented: Case Law | The appellant used inaccurate pin cites, including citations to factual and procedural-history pages that contained no supporting legal proposition.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Willie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission?
Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited three completely fictitious cases in his brief. One was cited five times, another twice, and the third once; the court found that the nonexistent authorities constituted spurious citations and a flagrant violation of the duty of candor. Outcome: Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations.. The pro se appellant submitted an appellate brief containing three completely fictitious cases, inaccurate citations, irrelevant authorities, incorrect pin cites, and substantive misstatements of the holdings of cited cases. The court held that the pervasive deficiencies and reliance on nonexistent case law prevented meaningful appellate review and violated the applicable briefing and certification rules. The appeal was dismissed.
Why does Willie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Appeal dismissed for pervasive briefing deficiencies, fictitious cases, and inaccurate legal citations. in Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Willie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission?
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.
Which source supports this Willie C. Fortune v. CTA Certified Transmission summary?
The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.

Related matters

Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.