Back to live profile
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
COURT EVIDENCE REPORTAV-ER-0CVCST2Generated September 12, 2026Evidence checked Sep 11, 2026
COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

E.D. Missouri

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

Matched records7
Source linked100%
Known amount total$1,000
Recorded rangeOct 16, 2025 Jul 10, 2026
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

What kinds of legal AI issues and responses appear in E.D. Missouri?

AI Vortex currently links 7 source-linked public matters associated with E.D. Missouri. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (7), Misrepresented authority (5) and Fabricated or altered quotations (3). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (4), Dismissal or adverse disposition (1) and Monetary sanction (1). 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?

Issue categories can overlap within one matter.
RECORDED RESPONSES

How did courts or authorities respond?

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

Who appears in these matters?

MATTER CONTEXT

Which practice areas are represented?

UNDERLYING EVIDENCE

Selected public records behind this report

Showing 7 of 7
Jul 10, 2026Holmes v. Cape Meadows Apartments HRMSE.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
May 19, 2026Syreeta LaShawn McNeal v. Vera L. Calvin, et al.E.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 31, 2026Jaii LeShawn Quinones v. Unknown Love, et al.E.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jan 30, 2026Theoda E. Mills, Jr. v. City of St. Louis, et al.E.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Nov 17, 2025Gittemeier v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance CompanyE.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Oct 20, 2025Megan Cowden v. US Treasury & IRSE.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Oct 16, 2025Serafin v. United States Department of State, et al.E.D. MissouriAI (implied, unspecified)Source
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.