Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 11, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 9, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Home/recorded consequences/None Adjudicated
Source-linked corpus view

None Adjudicated

None Adjudicated appears in 652 of 2,038 public corpus records (32%). This page describes the recorded dataset, not an incidence rate, prevalence of AI use, or a prediction of future outcomes.

Matched records652
Corpus denominator2,038
Source linked99.7%
Latest trackedSep 8, 2026
Evidence-based answer

What issues appear in matters recording None Adjudicated?

Taxonomy definition: The source records an allegation, dispute, or procedural reference, but the structured record does not identify an adjudicated consequence.

AI Vortex currently links 652 source-linked public matters that record None Adjudicated. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (541), Misrepresented authority (263) and Fabricated or altered quotations (174). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (652), Warning or admonishment (10) and Dismissal or adverse disposition (4). Categories can overlap within the same matter, and these counts describe this public corpus rather than the overall behavior or sanction rate of the consequence.

Every count below links to the exact matching records. The linked source, subsequent docket history, and local procedural context remain controlling.

Leading issue signalFabricated authorities541 records
Leading recorded responseNo adjudicated consequence recorded652 records
Known numeric amountsNone recorded0 known · 0 unquantified
Recorded date rangeMay 29, 2023through Sep 8, 2026
Observed issue mix

What problems appear in these records?

Issue categories can overlap within a single matter.

Recorded consequences

How did courts or authorities respond?

Response categories can overlap and do not imply that every matter ended in a sanction.

Participant context

Who appears in these matters?

Matter context

Which practice areas are represented?

Attribution status

How is AI involvement recorded?

Unspecified attribution is not evidence that a particular vendor was used.

Corpus evolution

When were these matters recorded?

Public records in this view

Showing the most recent 24 of 652 matching records.

G.P. v. Jose Hernandez ArevaloW.D. Washington · WA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Sep 8, 2026
Philippeaux v. United States, et al.S.D. New York · NY · AI (implied, unspecified)
Sep 8, 2026
Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India & Anr.Supreme Court of India · India · AI (implied, unspecified)
Sep 2, 2026
Woodley v. GottschallSC Pennsylvania · PA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Sep 1, 2026
Fleming v. The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 4383CRT British Columbia · Canada · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 31, 2026
Charlie Reyes v. Bryce Bailey, et al.D. New Mexico · NM · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 28, 2026
Estate of Bernie Leynell Nelson v Hurley Medical CenterCA Michigan · MI · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 28, 2026
Sanja Noble v. WMC Mortgage Corp. et al.CA Illinois · IL · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 28, 2026
United Food and Commercial Workers Canada Union, Local No. 401 v 1074867 ALBERTA LTD.Alberta LRB · Canada · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 28, 2026
Fairrow v. EastenCA Arizona · AZ · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 26, 2026
LPC Commercial Services, LLC v. Ar-Razzaaq Properties, LLCCA Virginia · VA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 25, 2026
Joseph M. Speranza v. Golden Technologies, Inc.D. Nevada · NV · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 21, 2026
Faiz Enterprise v. State Tax Officer, Unit-67, Surat & Anr.Gujarat High Court · India · Unidentified
Aug 20, 2026
Wilkinson v. SchmelzerCA Iowa · IA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 19, 2026
Davos FrancoisGAO (Comptroller General of the United States) · US · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 17, 2026
Davis v. Gopal, Didyuk, and Methodist Healthcare-Memphis HospitalsShelby County Circuit Court, Tenn. · US · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 14, 2026
IN RE: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability LitigationD. Arizona · AZ · ChatGPT
Aug 12, 2026
Egan v Commonwealth of AustraliaFederal Court · Australia · Unidentified
Aug 11, 2026
Fa’alagilagi Meni-Siliga v. A’s Contractor, Inc., et al.Los Angeles SC, California · CA · Irys
Aug 11, 2026
Meni-Silga v. State FarmSC California · CA · Irys
Aug 11, 2026
Brown v. Real Estate Capital of America et al.SC New York · NY · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 7, 2026
In the Matter of the Arbitration between LawCatch, Inc. and Counsel Stack, Inc.AAA Tribunal · Domestic Arbitration; USA · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 7, 2026
Wayne K. Smith, Sr. v. Polk County, et al.W.D. North Carolina · NC · Unidentified
Aug 7, 2026
Guertin-Giroux c. DelrueTAL Québec · Canada · Unidentified
Aug 6, 2026
Open the full analytics view

Scope and limitation

This page groups existing structured public-record fields. For judges, the counts describe matters in which that person is recorded as a decision-maker; they do not establish a judge’s general practices or sanction rate. For every entity type, the view is not a comparison against unobserved proceedings.

Indexing and evidence status

This public entity profile is indexable and meets the evidence-depth baseline of at least 3 source-linked records.