Aragon v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office
CA Colorado · Jul 2, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Colorado
- Record ID
- aragon-v-industrial-claim-appeals-office-2026-07-02
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the underlying order and issued a formal warning to counsel regarding the use of false quotations.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to counsel for including false case law quotations in an appellate brief. The court explicitly noted that such misrepresentations, regardless of whether they were generated by an AI tool, may result in future sanctions under Colorado appellate rules.
The court reasoned that the inclusion of false quotations violates the duty of candor in appellate submissions, specifically citing C.A.R. 28(a)(7)(B), and warned that such conduct warrants potential sanctions under C.A.R. 38(a).
This case illustrates judicial scrutiny of AI-assisted or otherwise inaccurate legal research in state appellate courts. It reinforces that counsel bears ultimate responsibility for the veracity of all citations, regardless of the tools used to generate them.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Quotes
- Administrative
- Appellate
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appellate review of a workers' compensation claim closure order.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court referenced the possibility of AI-generated false quotations.
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify all case law quotations and pincites against the original source text before filing.
- Implement a mandatory review process for all AI-generated research to ensure accuracy and prevent hallucinated citations.
- Ensure that all legal research is independently verified by human counsel to satisfy professional obligations of candor.