Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Was Anthony Wallace on the other side of your case?

Check their next brief before they file — Opposition Check verifies every citation in a filed brief for $49, no signup. Get Opposition Check →

Anthony Wallace v. PennyMac Loan Services, LLC, et al.

Court
D. Nevada
Jurisdiction
USA
Decided
2026-03-26
AI tool
Implied
Outcome
Warning
Monetary penalty
None reported

What was hallucinated

Fabricated: Case Law | Court found the cited 'Shapiro v JPMorgan Chase & Co., No. 1:13-cv-09764-PGG, 2014 WL 1224546' does not correspond to any case; SDNY docket shows the number not associated with that name. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court found 'Bally v. Home Loan Servicing, LP, No. 2:09-cv-02445-MCE-KJM, 2011 WL 867568' does not bring up a case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different matter. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court found 'Pasillas v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., No. 2:12-cv-01107, 2013 WL 3873227' cited in plaintiff's reply does not correspond to a case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different case in this court. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court found 'Boyle v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 2:13-cv-02021-APG-VCF, 2015 WL 1321435' does not correspond to any case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different case in this court. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court found 'Holmes v. Countrywide Financial Corp., No. 2:10-cv-00333-RCJ-PAL, 2010 WL 11597538' does not bring up a case by that name and the number refers to another matter in this court. || False Quotes: Case Law | Court found plaintiff cites Jolley at 213 Cal. App. 4th 872, 905 (2013) for a quoted passage, but the opinion at that citation (Jolley v. Chase Home Finance, LLC) does not contain the quoted language. || False Quotes: Case Law | Court found plaintiff purports to quote Weingartner v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 702 F. Supp. 2d 1276, 1288 (D. Nev. 2010), but the quoted language does not appear in that opinion.

Sanction teardown · D. Nevada, USA · 2026-03-26

Anthony Wallace v. PennyMac Loan Services, LLC, et al.

What happened

In D. Nevada, USA, a filing relied on an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool to help draft legal argument. The court identified the following problems with the citations in that filing:

  • Fabricated (Case Law)
    Court found the cited 'Shapiro v JPMorgan Chase & Co., No. 1:13-cv-09764-PGG, 2014 WL 1224546' does not correspond to any case; SDNY docket shows the number not associated with that name.
  • Fabricated (Case Law)
    Court found 'Bally v. Home Loan Servicing, LP, No. 2:09-cv-02445-MCE-KJM, 2011 WL 867568' does not bring up a case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different matter.
  • Fabricated (Case Law)
    Court found 'Pasillas v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., No. 2:12-cv-01107, 2013 WL 3873227' cited in plaintiff's reply does not correspond to a case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different case in this court.
  • Fabricated (Case Law)
    Court found 'Boyle v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 2:13-cv-02021-APG-VCF, 2015 WL 1321435' does not correspond to any case by that name and the case number is assigned to a different case in this court.
  • Fabricated (Case Law)
    Court found 'Holmes v. Countrywide Financial Corp., No. 2:10-cv-00333-RCJ-PAL, 2010 WL 11597538' does not bring up a case by that name and the number refers to another matter in this court.
  • False Quotes (Case Law)
    Court found plaintiff cites Jolley at 213 Cal. App. 4th 872, 905 (2013) for a quoted passage, but the opinion at that citation (Jolley v. Chase Home Finance, LLC) does not contain the quoted language.
  • False Quotes (Case Law)
    Court found plaintiff purports to quote Weingartner v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 702 F. Supp. 2d 1276, 1288 (D. Nev. 2010), but the quoted language does not appear in that opinion.

Which AI tool

an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool. Note: Charlotin's public database records tool attribution only where a court order, brief, or reporting on the matter states it explicitly; "unidentified" or "implied" means the record indicates AI use but does not name a specific product — we do not guess.

Outcome

Warning

How Citation Safe would have caught this

Citation Safe runs three deterministic layers before a brief is filed: (1) does the citation exist against CourtListener's database of published opinions, (2) if quoted, does that exact language appear in the source, (3) does the cited case actually support the proposition it is cited for. Fabricated case citations fail Layer 1. Fabricated or misattributed quotations fail Layer 2 even when the underlying case is real. Misrepresented holdings — a real case cited for a proposition it does not support — are the target of Layer 3. None of these checks involve asking another language model whether the citation looks right; they are lookups and text-matches against the actual source, which is why a hallucinated citation has to survive a direct lookup against the authoritative source — not another model's opinion — to earn a VERIFIED stamp; our measured false-verify rate is published live at /quality.

Check a brief before you file it → · See our live false-verify rate

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/1841/Wallace_v._Pennymac_USA_26_March_2026.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/1841/Wallace_v._Pennymac_USA_26_March_2026.pdf

Don’t be the next case in this database.

Citation Safe checks every citation against primary sources before it reaches a filing.

Try the free checkerBack to database

On the opposing side of their next motion?

Check their next brief through the same engine that would have caught this filing — $49, no signup, full annotated report you can attach to your Rule 11 or sanctions motion.

Open Opposition Check — $49Sanctions-motion template