Kingdom of Sweden v. Samantha Ashhadi Soliman

Ficha del Equipo Editorial a partir de la base mundial AI Hallucination Cases de Damien Charlotin. Verifica siempre en la fuente original.

El 1 de diciembre de 2025, CA California (Estados Unidos) conoció un asunto en el que una parte sin abogado (litigante pro se) se apoyó en una herramienta de IA generativa (no identificada en la decisión) y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. Appellant cited Southern Cal. Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Com. as holding courts must evaluate standing based on objective evidence; the court noted that Southern Cal. Gas does not discuss standing and thus was misapplied.
• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. Appellant relied on Patterson v. Superior Court for the proposition that courts cannot presume standing; the court observed Patterson does not address standing and that Patterson was disapproved by Ramirez.
• Fabricación de norma legal. In her reply brief appellant cited a nonexistent 'Code of Civil Procedure section 2330' claiming it mandates how agency relationships must be established; the court treated this statute as a nonexistent citation.
• Tergiversación de norma legal. Appellant misquoted Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (f)(2), claiming it bars granting summary judgment while a counter-motion is pending; the court noted the subdivision's actual text differs from appellant's description.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Appellant attributed the sentence 'Standing is a jurisdictional issue that must be addressed before the merits of a case may be reached.' to Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles; the court found the quoted language does not appear in that opinion.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Appellant quoted Angelucci v. Century Supper Club as stating 'A plaintiff must have a real, present interest in the outcome – not just a theoretical or governmental interest in enforcing its laws.' The court found the quote is not in Angelucci.

Desenlace

Admonishment. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de /documents/1114/Sweden_v._Ashhadi_USA_1_December_2025.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

¿Conoces un caso que falte, o uno colombiano que debamos cubrir a fondo? Escríbenos.