Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Was STC17832-2025 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 →

STC17832-2025

Court
Corte Suprema de Justicia
Jurisdiction
Colombia
Decided
2025-11-05
AI tool
Implied
Outcome
Order quashed
Monetary penalty
None reported

What was hallucinated

False Quotes: Case Law | Tribunal attributed a literal excerpt to CSJ STC13560-2023 that does not appear in that decision; Supreme Court reviewed the full text and concluded the quoted paragraph is nonexistent. || False Quotes: Case Law | Tribunal attributed a literal excerpt to CSJ STC4734-2025 asserting that acts outside the term cannot interrupt it; Supreme Court found that exact formulation is not in STC4734-2025.

Sanction teardown · Corte Suprema de Justicia, Colombia · 2025-11-05

STC17832-2025

What happened

In Corte Suprema de Justicia, Colombia, 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:

  • False Quotes (Case Law)
    Tribunal attributed a literal excerpt to CSJ STC13560-2023 that does not appear in that decision; Supreme Court reviewed the full text and concluded the quoted paragraph is nonexistent.
  • False Quotes (Case Law)
    Tribunal attributed a literal excerpt to CSJ STC4734-2025 asserting that acts outside the term cannot interrupt it; Supreme Court found that exact formulation is not in STC4734-2025.

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

Order quashed

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/1008/STC_17832-2025.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/1008/STC_17832-2025.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