Back to live profile
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
STATE EVIDENCE REPORTAV-ER-1J39UOZGenerated September 12, 2026Evidence checked Sep 11, 2026
STATE EVIDENCE REPORT

Connecticut

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

Matched records18
Source linked100%
Known amount total$5,000
Recorded rangeApr 30, 2025 Aug 5, 2026
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

What patterns appear in the public records associated with Connecticut?

AI Vortex currently links 18 source-linked public matters associated with Connecticut. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (12), Fabricated or altered quotations (8) and Misrepresented authority (8). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (8), Warning or admonishment (7) and Monetary sanction (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 state.

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 12 of 18
Aug 5, 2026Ulish Kerry Terrace Booker, III v. U.S. Bank National AssociationD. ConnecticutGemini Pro; Perplexity; Cetient Legal AI; ChatGPTSource
Aug 4, 2026Barteca Holdings v. TacobarnD. ConnecticutOpen Law; Claude; ChatGPTSource
Aug 4, 2026Sorrentino v. Fay Servicing, LLC, et al.D. ConnecticutAI (implied, unspecified)Source
May 8, 2026Kyne v. EhimaSC ConnecticutAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Apr 3, 2026In re: Kathleen A RabonD. Connecticut (Bankruptcy)AI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 31, 2026Christopher A. Ambrose v. Bandy X. LeeD. ConnecticutAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 31, 2026Mohamed Hussain et al. v. Mansoor Quraishi et al.SC ConnecticutUnidentifiedSource
Mar 30, 2026Jacobs v. Payward, Inc.D. ConnecticutAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Mar 27, 2026Plaintiff v. DefendantSC ConnecticutAI (implied, unspecified)Source
Feb 19, 2026Kosel Equity v. McGregorSC ConnecticutChatGPTSource
Feb 6, 2026Raul Gonzales Davila v. RoblenD. ConnecticutUnidentifiedSource
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.