- Joined
- Jun 1, 2026
- Messages
- 133
- Thread Author
- #1
Username: MMiqa
I am representing myself
What Case are you Appealing?: MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69
Link to the Original Case: Lawsuit: Dismissed - MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69
Basis for Appeal: Judge Superwoops' claim,
Supporting Evidence: What Are AI Hallucinations? | IBM
Post:
The hallucinations were the following, as is stated in my order: - Claim that the following section was in the CCA on June 2, 2026: "In civil lawsuits, crimes may be used to seek damages, although damages are not presumed" - Claim that the Redmont Civil Code Amendments Act amended CCA Part I to add the following provision at §6(1)(a): "In civil lawsuits, crimes may be used to seek damages, although damages are not presumed."
It was a red marked law I used on accident this was framed illegally as AI hallucination.
AI hallucination means :"An AI hallucination is a response generated by an artificial intelligence—most often a large language model—that contains false, fabricated, or misleading information presented as absolute fact."
In the same website, it gives us a difference between mistake vs AI hallucinations, which is important for your order and why you are biased or wrong.
Hallucinations vs. mistakes AI mistakes are a broader category that includes any kind of incorrect or suboptimal output from an AI model. AI hallucinations are a specific type of mistake where the system confidently generates false or fabricated information.Mistakes include simple inaccuracies, such as mislabeling an image or providing an outdated fact. They also cover biased recommendations, overly generic answers and subtle logical errors that don’t necessarily involve inventing facts but still lead to poor or incorrect outcomes.With ordinary mistakes, the issue is usually that some detail or assumption is incorrect. These issues are typically traceable, so AI engineers can focus on supplying better context or improving training data to correct the error.Hallucinations generally involve AI models producing fabricated content that has no grounding in real data. They can be harder to spot than other mistakes because their adherence to real patterns makes them seem authoritative. Hallucinations can “sound right” even when they are fundamentally wrong or unverifiable.
"Mistakes include simple inaccuracies, such as mislabeling an image or providing an outdated fact", outdated facts, such as using an amended law?
The claim had this in hand:
"The Redmont Civil Code Amendments Act amended CCA Part I to add the following provision at §6(1)(a):
"In civil lawsuits, crimes may be used to seek damages, although damages are not presumed.""
"On interference
This Court does not wish to address the question of whether any reliance on AI LLMs constitutes interference with the proper administration of justice. However, the hallucinations that the model produced in this case, and moreover, my suspicion that these were AI hallucinations, made it so I had to manually check if the Plaintiff's claims were true (they were not). This constitutes an interference with this Court's procedures and the administration of justice as a whole."
Judge Superwoops defined my mistake as "AI hallucination" where I made a mistake to refer an outdated law. This is exactly what human mistake is, according to IBM, which is one of the leading tech companies.
Judge reconsidered the order, and made the same mistake again.
I wish to appeal this.
Supporting Evidence: What Are AI Hallucinations? | IBM