Back to live profile
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
COURT EVIDENCE REPORTAV-ER-06D41DAGenerated September 12, 2026Evidence checked Sep 11, 2026
COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

E.D. Wisconsin

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

Matched records10
Source linked100%
Known amount total$4,500
Recorded rangeSep 15, 2023 Jun 23, 2026
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

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

AI Vortex currently links 10 source-linked public matters associated with E.D. Wisconsin. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (9), Fabricated or altered quotations (5) and Misrepresented authority (5). Recorded responses and outcomes include Warning or admonishment (5), No adjudicated consequence recorded (2) and Filing or pleading struck (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 10 of 10
Jun 23, 2026Xinyue Hippe v. Retention Brands, LLCE.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
May 11, 2026William Louis Armstrong, III v. City of MilwaukeeE.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jan 30, 2026SEC v. Joseph Nantomah et al.E.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Dec 18, 2025Gerou v. George, Whitten, and United StatesE.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Nov 4, 2025Alaya Coleman v. RPF-Somers Investors, LLC, et al.E.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Sep 18, 2025Pelishek v. City of SheboyganE.D. WisconsinWestlaw's Quick Check and AI Case Search ToolSource
Jan 22, 2025Arajuo v. Wedelstadt et alE.D. WisconsinUnidentifiedSource
Apr 18, 2024Plumbers & Gasfitters Union v. Morris PlumbingE.D. WisconsinAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Sep 15, 2023Frier v. HingissE.D. WisconsinAI (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.