Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al.
D. Colorado · Nov 28, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The court issued an Order to Show Cause requiring pro se plaintiffs to explain their submission of filings containing fabricated case citations, misrepresented legal propositions, and false quotes. The court warned that failure to justify this conduct under Rule 11(b) could lead to sanctions, including dismissal of claims or filing restrictions.
- Why the court cared
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion cites People ex rel. State Bd. of Equalization v. Hively, 336 P.2d 721 (1959) for a proposition about declaratory relief and ownership clarity that the case does not establish. || Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint cites Reagan v. Investors Mtg. Co., 977 P.2d 299 (Colo. App. 1999); court found no such case (Westlaw returns unrelated State v. Maier). || Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint cites In re Medina, 2012 WL 1368983 (Bankr. D. Colo.); court found no results for that citation. || False Quotes: Case Law | Motion to Disqualify quotes language attributed to Weeks v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. I-89, but the quoted language does not appear in that opinion. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion to Remand attributes the parenthetical proposition about remandability of quiet title/foreclosure disputes to Easton v. Crossland Mortgage Corp., but Easton did not address that issue. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion for Declaratory Judgment cites Koon v. Barmettler, 301 P.2d 713 (1956) for the proposition that declaratory judgment is appropriate to resolve quiet title, but Koon did not address that subject. || Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Response cites Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-41-201 to support a joinder rule for quiet title actions; the cited statute actually pertains to homestead exemptions and is unrelated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites First Nat’l Bank of Greeley v. Conway, 34 Colo. 372, 83 P. 361 (1905); court found that citation does not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites Hendricks v. Bank of America, N.A., 408 S.W.3d 688 (Tex. App. 2013); court found no such Texas Court of Appeals decision and noted the Ninth Circuit Hendricks decision cited does not support Plaintiffs' proposition. || Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites Goodman v. Heritage Savings & Loan Ass’n, 390 P.2d 712 (Colo. 1964); court determined this case does not exist as cited. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiffs cite In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897 (9th Cir. BAP 2011) for a proposition about the National Bank Act and recording requirements; the opinion exists but does not discuss the National Bank Act or recording requirements as Plaintiffs claim. || False Quotes: Case Law | Motion to Disqualify quotes material attributed to Cole v. Ruidoso Mun. Schs., but the quoted material is not present in that opinion.
- Why it matters now
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Colorado, with the listed outcome: Struck Filing; Order for future filings to include certificate; Required contact with the Federal Pro Se Clinic.
Why this matter is tracked
In Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC, the District of Colorado issued an Order to Show Cause regarding the pro se plaintiffs' repeated use of fabricated and misrepresented legal authority in multiple filings. The court identified numerous instances where plaintiffs cited non-existent cases, misquoted legitimate opinions, and misrepresented legal principles, despite one filing explicitly claiming it was not constructed with AI assistance. The court emphasized that pro se litigants are held to the same Rule 11 standards as attorneys. The order requires plaintiffs to explain their conduct and their process for verifying legal authority by November 7, 2025, warning that failure to respond may result in sanctions, including potential dismissal of claims or the imposition of filing restrictions.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Colorado, with the listed outcome: Struck Filing; Order for future filings to include certificate; Required contact with the Federal Pro Se Clinic.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The court noted plaintiffs appear to have used generative AI but did not identify a specific tool.
Order to Show Cause issued by Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella on October 17, 2025, requiring plaintiffs to respond by November 7, 2025.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
12 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion cites People ex rel. State Bd. of Equalization v. Hively, 336 P.2d 721 (1959) for a proposition about declaratory relief and ownership clarity that the case does not establish.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint cites Reagan v. Investors Mtg. Co., 977 P.2d 299 (Colo. App. 1999); court found no such case (Westlaw returns unrelated State v. Maier).
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complaint cites In re Medina, 2012 WL 1368983 (Bankr. D. Colo.); court found no results for that citation.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Motion to Disqualify quotes language attributed to Weeks v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. I-89, but the quoted language does not appear in that opinion.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion to Remand attributes the parenthetical proposition about remandability of quiet title/foreclosure disputes to Easton v. Crossland Mortgage Corp., but Easton did not address that issue.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Motion for Declaratory Judgment cites Koon v. Barmettler, 301 P.2d 713 (1956) for the proposition that declaratory judgment is appropriate to resolve quiet title, but Koon did not address that subject.
- Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Response cites Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-41-201 to support a joinder rule for quiet title actions; the cited statute actually pertains to homestead exemptions and is unrelated.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites First Nat’l Bank of Greeley v. Conway, 34 Colo. 372, 83 P. 361 (1905); court found that citation does not exist.
Show 4 additional discrepancies
- Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites Hendricks v. Bank of America, N.A., 408 S.W.3d 688 (Tex. App. 2013); court found no such Texas Court of Appeals decision and noted the Ninth Circuit Hendricks decision cited does not support Plaintiffs' proposition.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Response cites Goodman v. Heritage Savings & Loan Ass’n, 390 P.2d 712 (Colo. 1964); court determined this case does not exist as cited.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiffs cite In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897 (9th Cir. BAP 2011) for a proposition about the National Bank Act and recording requirements; the opinion exists but does not discuss the National Bank Act or recording requirements as Plaintiffs claim.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Motion to Disqualify quotes material attributed to Cole v. Ruidoso Mun. Schs., but the quoted material is not present in that opinion.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al.?
- The court issued an Order to Show Cause requiring pro se plaintiffs to explain their submission of filings containing fabricated case citations, misrepresented legal propositions, and false quotes. The court warned that failure to justify this conduct under Rule 11(b) could lead to sanctions, including dismissal of claims or filing restrictions.
- Why does Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Colorado, with the listed outcome: Struck Filing; Order for future filings to include certificate; Required contact with the Federal Pro Se Clinic.
- What does the public record establish about Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al.?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al. summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.