USA

Gerou v. George, Whitten, and United States

E.D. Wisconsin 18 December 2025
Party
Pro Se Litigant
AI Tool
Implied / unconfirmed

Hallucinated Content

Fabricated

  1. Case Law

    Petitioners cited 'Commercial Bank of Cleveland v. Ely (1853)'; court could not locate that case and found the similar Commercial Bank of Cleveland v. Iola, 154 U.S. 617 (1875) does not contain the quoted language.

  2. Case Law

    Petitioners repeatedly quoted 'Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco v. United States (1919)'; court was unable to locate any case with that name or date.

  3. Case Law

    Petitioners cited 'Farmers' & Mechanics' Bank v. Smith (1819)'; court could not locate any such case and noted the closest is an 1821 case that does not support petitioners' claims.

False Quotes

  1. Case Law

    Petitioners quoted Oates v. National Bank as stating banks 'may only deal in negotiable instruments and lawful money'; court found no such quote in Oates (100 U.S. 239 (1879)).

Misrepresented

  1. Case Law

    Petitioners attributed to National Bank v. Matthews a statement that banks 'cannot lend their credit to another'; court found the cited case (98 U.S. 621 (1878)) does not contain that statement.

  2. Case Law

    Petitioners cited 'Glover v. Standard Oil Co., 65 N.E.2d 389 (Ind. 1946)' to support that an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth; court traced citation to a different reported opinion which does not support that proposition.

  3. Case Law

    Petitioners cited Bank of Augusta v. Earle and Merchants' Bank v. State Bank as holding a bank that lends credit acts beyond its charter; court found those cases do not hold that proposition.


Outcome

Warning

View source document →