COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

SC Pennsylvania

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 USD amount totalNone recorded

Recorded rangeJan 7, 2026 – Oct 19, 2026

EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

What kinds of legal AI issues and responses appear in SC Pennsylvania?

AI Vortex currently links 10 source-linked public matters associated with SC Pennsylvania. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (10), Misrepresented authority (4) and Fabricated or altered quotations (2). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (7) and Warning or admonishment (3). 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 authorities10 · 100%Misrepresented authority4 · 40%Fabricated or altered quotations2 · 20%

Issue categories can overlap within one matter.

RECORDED RESPONSES

How did courts or authorities respond?

No adjudicated consequence recorded7 · 70%Warning or admonishment3 · 30%

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

PARTICIPANT CONTEXT

Who appears in these matters?

Pro Se Litigant8 · 80%Lawyer2 · 20%

MATTER CONTEXT

Which practice areas are represented?

Family6 · 60%Tort2 · 20%Contract1 · 10%Criminal1 · 10%

UNDERLYING EVIDENCE

Selected public records behind this report

Showing 10 of 10

Oct 19, 2026Commonwealth v. ButlerSC PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource

Sep 1, 2026Woodley v. GottschallSC PennsylvaniaUnidentifiedSource

Aug 27, 2026Paige Kiser & Ty Kiser v. DeSimone Auto Group et al.SC PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Aug 19, 2026Zoryana Kaspryak v. Mykhaylo StadarskyySC PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Aug 3, 2026Bisher v. Civic, et al.SC PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource

May 29, 2026Jaclyn Cocco v. Rosario Palmieri, Jr.SC PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

May 11, 2026Dorothea Bell v. Kelly BellSC PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource

Mar 13, 2026A.C. Appellant v. H.D. AND J.C.SC PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Jan 14, 2026Saber v. Navy Federal Credit UnionSC PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source

Jan 7, 2026Jessica Baker v. Ryan Joseph BakerSC PennsylvaniaUnidentifiedSource

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

Fake Citations10 shared records United States10 shared records Pennsylvania10 shared records None Adjudicated7 shared records Misrepresented Authority4 shared records Warning3 shared records

Cite this page

Bluebook: AI Vortex, SC Pennsylvania Evidence Report, Legal AI Risk Tracker (updated Oct. 26, 2026), https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/sc-pennsylvania/report (last visited Oct. 26, 2026).
APA: AI Vortex. (2026, October 26). SC Pennsylvania Evidence Report. Legal AI Risk Tracker. Retrieved October 26, 2026, from https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/sc-pennsylvania/report
URL: https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/sc-pennsylvania/report (accessed 2026-10-26)

Cites the AI Vortex page, not the underlying decision; cite the court's own document for the holding.