Back to live profile
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
COURT EVIDENCE REPORTAV-ER-0CXXJM8Generated September 12, 2026Evidence checked Sep 11, 2026
COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

E.D. North Carolina

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
Recorded rangeDec 16, 2024 Aug 3, 2026
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

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

AI Vortex currently links 7 source-linked public matters associated with E.D. North Carolina. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (7), Fabricated or altered quotations (3) and Misrepresented authority (3). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (3), Warning or admonishment (3) and Bar or professional referral (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
Aug 3, 2026Damon Forney v. Township of Cary, North CarolinaE.D. North CarolinaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jul 15, 2026Christine Thomas v. United States Department of Justice, et al.E.D. North CarolinaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 26, 2026Curry v. Capital One Auto FinanceE.D. North CarolinaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 2, 2026Derence V. Fivehouse v. United States Department of Defense et al.E.D. North CarolinaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jan 13, 2026Reketta L. Montgomery v. Acquisition Experts, LLCE.D. North CarolinaUnidentifiedSource
Oct 3, 2025United States of America v. Lorenzio Reshaud SimmonsE.D. North CarolinaUnidentifiedSource
Dec 16, 2024Letts v. Avidien TechnologiesE.D. North CarolinaAI (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.