Back to live profile
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
COURT EVIDENCE REPORTAV-ER-193UA66Generated November 4, 2026Evidence checked Nov 3, 2026
COURT EVIDENCE REPORT

Superior Court of 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 Superior Court of Pennsylvania?

AI Vortex currently links 10 source-linked public matters associated with Superior Court of 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?

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
Oct 19, 2026Commonwealth v. ButlerSuperior Court of PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource
Sep 1, 2026Woodley v. GottschallSuperior Court of PennsylvaniaUnidentifiedSource
Aug 27, 2026Paige Kiser & Ty Kiser v. DeSimone Auto Group et al.Superior Court of PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Aug 19, 2026Zoryana Kaspryak v. Mykhaylo StadarskyySuperior Court of PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Aug 3, 2026Bisher v. Civic, et al.Superior Court of PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource
May 29, 2026Jaclyn Cocco v. Rosario Palmieri, Jr.Superior Court of PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
May 11, 2026Dorothea Bell v. Kelly BellSuperior Court of PennsylvaniaNo tool named in sourceSource
Mar 13, 2026A.C. Appellant v. H.D. AND J.C.Superior Court of PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jan 14, 2026Saber v. Navy Federal Credit UnionSuperior Court of PennsylvaniaAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Jan 7, 2026Jessica Baker v. Ryan Joseph BakerSuperior Court of 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.

Cite this page

Bluebook

AI Vortex, Superior Court of Pennsylvania Evidence Report, Legal AI Risk Tracker (updated Nov. 3, 2026), https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/superior-court-of-pennsylvania/report (last visited Nov. 3, 2026).

APA

AI Vortex. (2026, November 3). Superior Court of Pennsylvania Evidence Report. Legal AI Risk Tracker. Retrieved November 3, 2026, from https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/superior-court-of-pennsylvania/report

URL

https://www.aivortex.io/legal-ai-risk/courts/superior-court-of-pennsylvania/report (accessed 2026-11-03)

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