Saad Hanna v. Kimberly A. Nelson
Colorado CA · Jan 8, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- Colorado CA
- Record ID
- saad-hanna-v-kimberly-a-nelson-2026-01-08
- Observed outcome
- The court affirmed the lower court's denial of the Rule 60(b) motion and denied the defendant's request for appellate attorney fees and sanctions.
- Known monetary consequence
- $0
Why this matter warrants attention
The court declined to impose sanctions against the pro se appellant for including AI-generated fabricated citations in his brief. The court determined that the appellant was a first-time offender and that the conduct, while improper, did not meet the threshold of egregious behavior necessary to warrant sanctions against a self-represented litigant.
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's brief contained allegedly three AI-generated citations to nonexistent cases; doctor alleged fictitious cases produced by GenAI; court recognized at least some citations were fabricated. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant incorrectly cited an unpublished decision that does exist: People in Interest of J.L.S.; citation was misused and violates court's policy on unpublished opinions. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant miscited In re Estate of Ongaro; the case exists but does not articulate the test Hanna attributed to it.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Colorado CA, with the listed outcome: Warning; No adverse costs order.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Published Opinion
- Tort
- Trial
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- Generative AI (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- $0
- Procedural posture
- Appeal of a district court order denying a C.R.C.P. 60(b) motion for relief from judgment.
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 refers to the use of a generative artificial intelligence tool.
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.