Plaintiff sued defendant and won on summary judgment. Defendant sought review with the Missouri Court of Appeals. On appeal, the court dismissed the appeal and awarded damages to plaintiff/respondent because of the frivolousness of the appeal.
“Due to numerous fatal briefing deficiencies under the Rules of Appellate Procedure that prevent us from engaging in meaningful review, including the submission of fictitious cases generated by [AI], we dismiss the appeal.” With this, the court began its roast of the pro se appellant’s conduct.
The court detailed appellant’s numerous violations of the applicable Rules of Appellate Procedures. The appellate brief was unsigned, it had no required appendix, and had an inadequate statement of facts. It failed to provide points relied on, and a detailed table of cases, statutes and other authorities.
But the court made the biggest deal about how “the overwhelming majority of the [brief’s] citations are not only inaccurate but entirely fictitious.” Only two out of the twenty-four case citations in the brief were genuine.
Though appellant apologized for the fake cases in his reply brief, the court was not moved, because “the deed had been done.” It characterized the conduct as “a flagrant violation of the duties of candor” appellant owed to the court, and an “abuse of the judicial system.”
Because appellant “substantially failed to comply with court rules,” the court dismissed the appeal and ordered appellant to pay $10,000 in damages for filing a frivolous appeal.
Kruse v. Karlen, — S.W.3d —, 2024 WL 559497 (Mo. Ct. App. February 13, 2024)
See also: