Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations
Jennings v. Vandergriff Honda
Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth · State appellate courts · TX · · No. No. 02-25-00429-CV · opinion
On 2026-05-28, in Christian Lavell Jennings v. Vandergriff Honda, Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the judgment and noted that the appellant's briefing relied on a nonexistent case and fabricated quotations. A self-represented appellant filed a motion using quotations that did not appear in the cited source, nonexistent or hallucinated authorities, and authorities used for propositions they did not support.
- Disposition
- The court affirmed the judgment confirming the arbitration award and imposed no consequence for the nonexistent citations.
- Recorded conduct
- The pro se appellant cited at least four nonexistent cases and attributed quotations to the Texas Supreme Court that did not appear in those cases. The court affirmed and imposed no consequence for the citation issue. — outcome: noted, no consequence; 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.
Whether the trial court entered judgment despite Appellee initiating the state court action without proper notice to Appellant, and whether this lack of notice constitutes a fundamental procedural defect warranting reversal[;] The alleged contents of the USB drive do not appear anywhere in the record. 3. Whether the trial court violated Appellant’s procedural due process rights by failing to review the full record or provide Appellant with a meaningful opportunity to be heard before rendering the final judgment[;] 4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by entering judgment while critical dispositive motions—including a Motion to Vacate the Order Granting Retention and a Motion for Sanctions—remained pending, unopposed, and unadjudicated[; and] 5. Whether the trial court failed to address or acknowledge Appellant’s formal and noticed concerns about the misconduct of its own court coordinator Tracy J Laffoon, thereby depriving Appellant of an impartial forum and compounding the denial of procedural due process. Jennings has forfeited her complaints due to inadequate briefing. Notwithstanding Jennings’s forfeited complaints, we conclude that the trial court did not err when it confirmed the arbitration award. A. Standard of Review Texas law favors arbitration. Hoskins v. Hoskins, 497 S.W.3d 490, 494 (Tex. 2016); Brady v. Brady, Nos.
Authorities cited in the passage: Standard of Review Texas law favors arbitration. Hoskins v. Hoskins, 497 S · Brady v. Brady
compiled by the SafeLegalAI editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-08v0.2.2coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub
Hugging Face