Woodley v. Gottschall
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 1, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- Record ID
- woodley-v-gottschall-2026-09-01
- Observed outcome
- The court identified the citations as nonexistent; the related claims were waived, and the judgment of sentence was affirmed.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | The appellant cited In re G.B.K. as a Pennsylvania Superior Court case, but the cited page contained headnotes for a New Jersey landlord-tenant case and no reported Pennsylvania case with that caption existed. Outcome: The court identified the citations as nonexistent; the related claims were waived, and the judgment of sentence was affirmed.. In his pro se appellate brief, Gottschall cited In re G.B.K., 720 A.2d 362 (Pa. Super. 1998), and Commonwealth v. Drahus, 663 A.2d 611 (Pa. Super. 1995). The Superior Court determined that neither was a reported Pennsylvania case: the first citation led to headnotes for a New Jersey landlord-tenant case, and the second citation led to the beginning of a New Hampshire constructive-trust case. The court gave no merits consideration to the First Amendment claim supported by the nonexistent Drahus citation because the claim was also unpreserved, and affirmed the contempt judgment.
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records The court identified the citations as nonexistent; the related claims were waived, and the judgment of sentence was affirmed.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with The court identified the citations as nonexistent; the related claims were waived, and the judgment of sentence was affirmed. in Superior Court of Pennsylvania. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court identified the citations as nonexistent; the related claims were waived, and the judgment of sentence was affirmed.
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
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.