Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
In re the Marriage of Joanne Rodrigues and Nathan Craig
California Court of Appeal, Sixth District · State appellate courts · CA · · 2026 WL 1102361 · No. 20FL000750 · opinion
The California Court of Appeal, Sixth District on 2026-04-22 affirmed the status-only judgment and postjudgment orders and ordered the parties to bear their own appellate costs in In re the Marriage of Joanne Rodrigues and Nathan Craig. The self-represented appellant filed a brief with nine fabricated case citations.
- Disposition
- The court affirmed the status-only judgment and postjudgment orders and ordered the parties to bear their own appellate costs.
- Recorded conduct
- The self-represented appellant filed a brief with nine fabricated case citations. — outcome: other; actor: litigant in person
- Canonical record
- Incident tracker entry — verified outcome, regulator disposition and related rules
What the court wrote
Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.
) Appellant's brief does not engage with the applicable standards of review. It contains little if any legal argument or citations to relevant authority. Instead, the brief cites authorities that do not support the propositions for which they are cited; decisions that have been disapproved by the Supreme Court; 10 and numerous nonexistent cases. 11 Extensive reliance on nonexistent legal authority could alone justify dismissing an appeal as “frivolous because it ‘rests on negligible legal foundation’ [Citations] and is peppered with fabricatedlegalcitations[,]... [andalso]unreasonablyviolates the Rules of Court because it does not support each point with citationstoreal(asopposedtofabricated)legalauthority. (See rule8. 204(a)(1)(B). )”(Nolandv. LandoftheFree,L. P.
compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face