CiteProof citation check

A brief with a wrong case, a bad volume, and a changed quote

One brief, every failure shape: a swapped name that resolves to the real case, a volume that was never published, a word moved in a quote, and one clean cite. The sample Verification Record renders from this run.

5 citations found, 2 quotes found

  • 2 from cache
  • 2 live lookups
  • 0 opinion texts fetched
  • 5 citations checked

Data snapshot fixture-corpus (not the live public corpus). Run 2026-10-13T18:30:19+00:00. Record 011c93ac27f8.

Record 011c93ac27f8 · checked 2026-10-13T18:30:19+00:00

Brief SHA-256: 3d67e3b74ba012a72059b6330b640a2e937ab3f145170b61931504be3db5040d

Scannable audit code for this record
Show

Verified (2)

Matched a case in the public record.

[ VERIFIED ] 516 F.3d 1235, 1244 (11th Cir. 2008) pinned to 1244 (11th Cir. 2008)

Case name and year match the cited case.

Resolved to Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States 11th Cir. 2008-02-15

Still good law? We don't decide that — check what has cited this case since:

Lexis/Westlaw subscribers: Shepardize or KeyCite this citation there. No free search replaces that check.

Quote as written

[N]on-exempt portions of a document must be disclosed unless they are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions.

Closest passage in the opinion (majority) match confidence: high

[N]on-exempt portions of a document must be disclosed unless they are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions.

Similarity 100% · 0 passage fragments compared

[ VERIFIED ] Id. at 1245 id. reference pinned to 1245

Case name and year match the cited case.

Resolved to Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States 11th Cir. 2008-02-15

No quoted passage was attached, so this confirms existence and case identity only.

Still good law? We don't decide that — check what has cited this case since:

Lexis/Westlaw subscribers: Shepardize or KeyCite this citation there. No free search replaces that check.

Needs attention (3)

Citations here are wrong, or right but worth reading yourself.

0 of 3 reviewed

Not found (1)

[ NOT FOUND ] 999 U.S. 999 (2099) (U.S. 2099)

Not found in the public corpus. Verify manually.

Publication check (suspicious): U.S. Reports has not reached volume 999. A real citation cannot cite a volume that was never published -- verify this one letter by letter.

Wrong case (1)

[ CHECK CASE ] 738 F.2d 1153 (11th Cir. 1984) (11th Cir. 1984)

Cited case name does not match the case at this citation.

Resolved to Gibbs v. Maxwell House 11th Cir. 1984-08-09

Still good law? We don't decide that — check what has cited this case since:

Lexis/Westlaw subscribers: Shepardize or KeyCite this citation there. No free search replaces that check.

Brief claims

Holliday v. Atl. Capital Corp. (1984)

Public record has

Gibbs v. Maxwell House (1984)

Did you mean Gibbs v. Maxwell House, 738 F.2d 1153 (1984)? Verify before filing.

Publication check (consistent): Reporter, volume and year fit the publication history of Federal Reporter, 2d. This is not verification -- the citation still needs a manual check, it just shows no publication-history red flags.

Needs review (1)

[ REVIEW ] 516 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2008) (11th Cir. 2008)

Case name and year match the cited case. Closest match needs review: the match changes a number or a negation.

Resolved to Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States 11th Cir. 2008-02-15

Still good law? We don't decide that — check what has cited this case since:

Lexis/Westlaw subscribers: Shepardize or KeyCite this citation there. No free search replaces that check.

Quote as written

Non-exempt portions of a document must not be disclosed unless they are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions.

Closest passage in the opinion (majority) match confidence: low — meaning differs

[N]on-exempt portions of a document must be disclosed unless they are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions.”
  • the match changes a number or a negation

Negation differs

not

The opinion contains , but your quote has not.

Similarity 97% · 1 passage fragments compared

Publication check (consistent): Reporter, volume and year fit the publication history of Federal Reporter, 3d. This is not verification -- the citation still needs a manual check, it just shows no publication-history red flags.

This record verifies citation existence and quote accuracy against public court records. It does not verify that cited authority supports the proposition for which it is cited, nor whether the authority remains good law. It does not detect all possible citation errors. Attorney review required under Rule 11.