Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0MUJ6LHGenerated October 23, 2026Evidence checked Oct 23, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Yuliana Padilla González v. Sergio Alejandro Vargas Vargas

CA San José · Jun 29, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
CA San José
Record ID
yuliana-padilla-gonzalez-v-sergio-alejandro-vargas-vargas-2026-06-29
Observed outcome
Warning
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Outdated Advice: Repealed Law | The appeal relied on Article 221 of the former Code of Civil Procedure, Law 7130, even though that provision had been repealed. The court identified this as use of outdated legislation consistent with unverified AI-assisted drafting. Outcome: Warning.

Why the decision-maker cared

The structured public record identifies fake citations and tort and records Warning. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.

Why it matters now

This matter connects fake citations and tort with Warning in CA San José. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Tort
  • Appellate
  • Warning
AI attribution
Reported
Recorded tool
AI (implied, unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Warning
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

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.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.
EXPLAINABLE COMPARATORS

Related public matters

Deen v. VMK, Inc.CA California (6d) · Oct 13, 2026fake citations + tort · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Sani v. Institute for Human ReproductionCA Illinois · Aug 18, 2026fake citations + tort · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Garciduenas v. Matrix New World Engineering, Inc.CA Arizona (1d) · Jul 23, 2026fake citations + tort · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)