Kaleb Alexander Hoosier v. Executive Centre Association, et al.
D. Hawai‘i · Oct 31, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- D. Hawai‘i
- Record ID
- kaleb-alexander-hoosier-v-executive-centre-association-et-al-2025-10-31
- Observed outcome
- Complaint dismissed with leave to amend by December 3, 2025.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend, citing failure to state a claim and the inclusion of likely AI-hallucinated legal authorities. The court did not impose sanctions but issued a formal warning regarding the duty to verify sources and comply with local rules concerning AI-generated filings.
Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Complaint cites "ROH § 14-1" in support of a "public easement sidewalk" proposition; court noted ROH § 14-1 actually concerns use of Polynesian plants and does not support the cited proposition. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Complaint cites "ROH § 29-7.2" for the proposition that intentional confinement via trespass is unlawful; the court found no such section and observed ROH ch.29 pertains to affordable housing. || Fabricated: Case Law | "Blair v. City of Honolulu" cited in the complaint but does not appear to exist; court flagged it as likely fictitious.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Hawai‘i, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucinated_case_law
- Misrepresented_legal_norm
- Fabricated_legal_norm
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Order granting in forma pauperis application and dismissing complaint with leave to amend.
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
Court refers to AI generally.
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.