AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesXavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 80/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

Xavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.

N.D. Indiana · Nov 4, 2025

IN / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotescontractNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Court identified that the pro se plaintiff submitted fabricated legal citations in his filings. While the Court permitted the filing of a 'Case Law Verification Index,' it explicitly warned that this did not validate the existence of the cited cases and recommended dismissal of the underlying complaint for failure to state a claim.

Why the court cared
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Citizens Nat’l Bank of Paris v. Midwest Agri-Dev. Corp., 887 F.2d 1128, 1134 (7th Cir. 1989)'; the Court found the reporter citation corresponds to an unrelated First Circuit opinion, no Seventh Circuit case by that name from 1989 appears to exist, and it could not locate any case containing the quoted language.
Why it matters now
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Indiana, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

Why this matter is tracked

In a pro se action against Santander Consumer USA Inc., the plaintiff submitted a 'Case Law Verification Index' containing fabricated legal citations. The Magistrate Judge noted that the plaintiff cited a non-existent Seventh Circuit case, 'Citizens Nat’l Bank of Paris v. Midwest Agri-Dev. Corp., 887 F.2d 1128 (7th Cir. 1989),' which actually corresponds to an unrelated First Circuit opinion. The Court granted the motion to file the index but clarified that this did not validate the existence or accuracy of the cited authorities. The Court ultimately recommended granting the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, noting that the plaintiff's reliance on non-existent case law failed to support his legal arguments regarding loan discharge.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Indiana, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

Record details

IndianaSingle-state evidence scope
Explore INOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtN.D. Indiana
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit7th Circuit
DateNov 4, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeThe Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Court grant the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety and deny the plaintiff's motion to alter judgment.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court record does not name a tool, but the nature of the errors implies AI usage.

Procedural posture

Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge recommending dismissal of the complaint and denial of a motion to alter judgment.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited 'Citizens Nat’l Bank of Paris v. Midwest Agri-Dev. Corp., 887 F.2d 1128, 1134 (7th Cir. 1989)'; the Court found the reporter citation corresponds to an unrelated First Circuit opinion, no Seventh Circuit case by that name from 1989 appears to exist, and it could not locate any case containing the quoted language.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Xavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.?
The Court identified that the pro se plaintiff submitted fabricated legal citations in his filings. While the Court permitted the filing of a 'Case Law Verification Index,' it explicitly warned that this did not validate the existence of the cited cases and recommended dismissal of the underlying complaint for failure to state a claim.
Why does Xavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in N.D. Indiana, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
What does the public record establish about Xavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.?
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.
Which source supports this Xavier Jamal Smith v. Santander Consumer USA Inc. 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.

William C. Maxwell v. Dakota Michael & Chelsey SmithS.D. Indiana · May 26, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citationsElbert Coleman, III; Elbert Coleman, IV v. Nexo Capital Inc.S.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citationsMichael Platt v. Volunteers of America Ohio & IndianaS.D. Indiana · Mar 10, 2026same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citationsKamia Nellum v. Credit Acceptance CorporationS.D. Indiana · Nov 18, 2025same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citationsTsupko v. Kinetic Advantage, LLCS.D. Indiana · Sep 17, 2025same jurisdiction · pro se + fake citationsAndDone, LLC v. Shante Gaines; Reset Financial Group, LLCW.D. Missouri · Aug 25, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)