Coleman & Lewis v. PNC Bank, N.A.
D. Nevada · Nov 5, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- D. Nevada
- Record ID
- coleman-lewis-v-pnc-bank-na-2025-11-05
- Observed outcome
- The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss and issued a formal warning to the plaintiffs regarding the use of inaccurate or fabricated legal citations.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a warning to the pro se plaintiffs after identifying multiple instances of AI-hallucinated legal citations and fabricated case law in their briefing. The court explicitly cautioned that any subsequent filings containing similar issues could result in formal sanctions, including the imposition of costs and fees.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited non-existent quotes attributed to Medrano v. Flagstar Bank; the Court flagged these as inaccurate/AI-hallucinated. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited non-existent quotes attributed to Guerra v. Just Mortgage, Inc.; the Court identified these as inaccurate/AI-hallucinated. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs attributed non-existent quotations to Collins v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n; the Court noted the citation contained incorrect or fabricated quoted material. || False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs attributed non-existent quotations to Chapman v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co.; the Court marked these as inaccurate/AI-hallucinated citations. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs fabricated an entire case, citing 'Estate of Bowles v. Comm'r, 608 F. Appx. 693 (9th Cir. 2015)'; the Court found this citation was fabricated/misattributed (not a 9th Cir. opinion) and noted the nearby real citation was United States v. Martinez, 608 Fed. Appx. 692 (10th Cir. 2015).
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Nevada, with the listed outcome: Warning.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Contract
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss and denied the plaintiffs' outstanding motions as moot following a review of the amended complaint and related filings.
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 explicitly identified the citations as AI-hallucinated.
Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.