COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

CA California

A print-ready review packet of the issues, recorded responses, participant context, and source-linked matters currently associated with this profile.

Matched records26

Source linked100%

Known amount total$95,955

Recorded rangeJul 18, 2025 – Aug 19, 2026

EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

What kinds of legal AI issues and responses appear in CA California?

AI Vortex currently links 26 source-linked public matters associated with CA California. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (24), Fabricated or altered quotations (12) and Misrepresented authority (12). Recorded responses and outcomes include Monetary sanction (10), Warning or admonishment (8) and Bar or professional referral (6). Categories can overlap within the same matter, and these counts describe this public corpus rather than the overall behavior or sanction rate of the court.

Every distribution below links to the exact matching records. This report does not convert corpus counts into a behavioral prediction.

OBSERVED ISSUE MIX

What problems appear in these records?

Fabricated authorities24 · 92.3%Fabricated or altered quotations12 · 46.2%Misrepresented authority12 · 46.2%

Issue categories can overlap within one matter.

RECORDED RESPONSES

How did courts or authorities respond?

Monetary sanction10 · 38.5%Warning or admonishment8 · 30.8%Bar or professional referral6 · 23.1%No adjudicated consequence recorded6 · 23.1%Professional discipline5 · 19.2%Filing or pleading struck2 · 7.7%

A recorded response does not imply that every matter ended in a sanction.

PARTICIPANT CONTEXT

Who appears in these matters?

Pro Se Litigant14 · 53.8%Lawyer10 · 38.5%Lawyer; Judge1 · 3.8%Prosecutor1 · 3.8%

MATTER CONTEXT

Which practice areas are represented?

Contract9 · 34.6%Family5 · 19.2%Employment3 · 11.5%Tort2 · 7.7%

UNDERLYING EVIDENCE

Selected public records behind this report

Showing 12 of 26

Aug 19, 2026In re the Marriage of Kira Lindsay and Jamie Alexander DillonCA CaliforniaUnidentifiedSource

Mar 5, 2026Joan Pablo Torres Campos v. Leslie Ann MunozCA CaliforniaUnidentifiedSource

Feb 26, 2026Samuel K. v. Winsley FociaCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Feb 25, 2026Anthony Jama Hall v. Superior Court of Sacramento CountyCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Feb 19, 2026Bixler v. Church of ScientologyCA CaliforniaUnidentifiedSource

Feb 18, 2026EFD USA, INC., et al. v. Band Pro Film and Digital, Inc., et al.CA CaliforniaUnidentifiedSource

Feb 17, 2026Alejandro Rios v. Puente Hills FordCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Jan 29, 2026Ava Naeini v. Confluent Inc.CA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Jan 14, 2026Kjoller v. CaliforniaCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Dec 18, 2025JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Christina BuenzliCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Dec 17, 2025L.A. Housing Outreach, LLC v. MedoffCA CaliforniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Dec 15, 2025Howell Management Services, LLC v. Vashisht-RotaCA CaliforniaUnidentifiedSource

Open all matching records

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

Scope, traceability, and limits

This report 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 general practices, sanction rates, or future behavior.

The complete docket, later history, local rules, standing orders, and controlling primary materials remain authoritative.

CONNECTED INTELLIGENCE

Related corpus profiles

United States26 shared records California26 shared records Fake Citations24 shared records Misrepresented Authority12 shared records Fabricated Quotes12 shared records Monetary10 shared records