ApodictaShow me on my files

California · federal district court · 2026

Estate of Khallid Muhammad v. Tupac Shakur Estate

District Court, C.D. California, 26 February 2026. What the court wrote about citations that did not exist, in its own words, from the document on file.

Case record · C.D. Cal.

  1. Court. District Court, C.D. CaliforniaCOURT
  2. Level. federal district courtLEVEL
  3. Date. 26 February 2026DATED
  4. Docket. No. 2:25-cv-02540DOCKET
  5. Judge. Josephine L. StatonJUDGE
  6. Documents. one document, 2 passages quoted belowON FILE
  7. 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.

Docket entry 50, 26 February 2026 · source · PDF · 2 pages

Docket text. MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) Order Requiring Plaintiffs to Appear and Show Cause as to Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed by Judge Josephine L. Staton: The Court finds it both vague and deficient. Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO APPEAR on 3/6/2026 at 10:30 AM., to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned for providing non-existent case citations to the Court. Defendants may, but are not required to, appear at the hearing. (jp)

(Doc. 46.) In the Order, the Court required Plaintiffs to provide explanation for citations to non-existent authority, and to disclose any use of Artificial Intelligence to the Court. On February 25, 2026, Plaintiffs responded.

Tupac Shakur Estate et al ______________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 2 Having reviewed Plaintiffs’ response, the Court finds it both vague and deficient. Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO APPEAR on March 6, 2026 at 10:30am in Courtroom 8A to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned for providing non-existent case citations to the Court. Defendants may, but are not required to, appear at the hearing.

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, C.D. California, from California, 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