ApodictaShow me on my files

Florida · state appellate court · 2026

Capital Standard, LLC, Tchentsov v. US Bank National Association, Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-AC9

District Court of Appeal of Florida, 21 August 2026. What the court wrote about citations that did not exist, in its own words, from the document on file.

Case record · Fla. Dist. Ct. App.

  1. Court. District Court of Appeal of FloridaCOURT
  2. Level. state appellate courtLEVEL
  3. Date. 21 August 2026DATED
  4. Docket. No. 2D2024-1392DOCKET
  5. Documents. one document, 8 passages quoted belowON FILE
  6. Source. CourtListenerSOURCE

Retrieved · the text below was read from the source documents on that day.

What the court wrote

The passages in which the court addresses the fabricated authority, verbatim, by document. A bracketed ellipsis marks where a passage was cut for length; nothing else is changed.

Published opinion, 21 August 2026 · source · PDF · 16 pages

We conclude that Capital Standard's arguments lack merit, and we affirm the judgment in all respects without further comment. We write, however, to sanction Capital Standard's counsel, Kenneth Keefe, for his rampant use of hallucinated citations to legal authority in his amended initial brief and subsequent reply brief and to explain the rationale for the sanctions that we impose.1 It's been three years since the release of the widely publicized decision in Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F.

Blanche, 177 F.4th 1014, 1024 (9th Cir. 2026) (citing Magesh et al., Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools, 22 J.

216, 221 (2025)). "Fabrications are instances in which the generative AI tool provides cases or quotations that do not exist at all." Id. (citing 22 Empirical Legal Stud. at 221, 230).

What's more, it's been the focus of a mushrooming number of decisions from multiple Florida district courts of appeal.3 In short, at this point in time, it defies belief for a practicing 2 Damien Charlotin, a French attorney and lecturer in "legal data analysis," has developed a database referenced by multiple courts that tracks court orders related to AI-hallucinations. AI Hallucination Cases, Damien Charlotin, https://www.damiencharlotin.com/hallucinations (last visited Aug. 7, 2026).

7, 2026). As of this opinion, Charlotin has identified 497 cases in the United States involving attorneys' reliance on AI hallucinations. Id.

3d 1185, 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024) (imposing sanctions on a pro se litigant for submitting a brief that included "fictitious case law"). 4 attorney to plead ignorance of the risks of relying on generative AI without double-checking the results.

Capital Standard's original initial brief was replete with nonexistent quotations and purported statements of law with wholly inaccurate cites.

5 transaction" and that "[r]atification occurs when a party, through its actions or inactions, affirms a transaction or fails to repudiate it within a reasonable time." • Serving up nonexistent quotes—complete with purported pincites—such as, "[fundamental error] goes to the foundation of the case or the merits of the cause of action and is equivalent to a denial of due process," citing Hart Properties, Inc. v.

What the text mentions

Pattern matches on the documents' text. Each line is a fact that the text contains the words, not a finding about the case.

Where this fits

This page is a record, not legal advice. It quotes the documents on file and lists what their text mentions. Read the decision at the source before relying on it, and check whether a later order changed it.

More from District Court of Appeal of Florida, from Florida, or from 2026. The whole record is at court decisions on AI-hallucinated citations.

Every case in this record shares one cause: a citation reached a court without anyone opening it. What a citation gate is explains the mechanism that makes that impossible by construction; how to check an AI citation in five minutes is the manual version; the sanctions record is the essay this table grew out of.

Show me on one of my files →

This case is about a cite nobody opened. See a cite checked against the record before it renders, on your own file.

Show me on one of my filesTry the gate
Show me on my files