HomeCasesSample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc

D. New Mexico · May 26, 2026

NM / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotescivil rights

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. Outcome: Warning.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Warning; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. New Mexico, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. Outcome: Warning.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. New Mexico, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

New MexicoSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtD. New Mexico

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit10th Circuit

DateMay 26, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Warning

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case.
False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs quoted 'Responses to objections are required unless the court orders otherwise' as from Gonzales, but the court found that language does not appear in the Tenth Circuit decision.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc?: Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. Outcome: Warning.
Why does Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in D. New Mexico, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc?: 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.
Which source supports this Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc 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.

Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (1)D. New Mexico · Nov 5, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al. (2)D. New Mexico · May 21, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Clifford Robert Cummings v. The Estate of Forrest FennD. New Mexico · Oct 30, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Lipe v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1)D. New Mexico · Sep 22, 2025same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Tomlin v. State of New MexicoD. New Mexico · Feb 1, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Danielle L. Neri v. Board of Education for Albuquerque Public SchoolsD. New Mexico · May 7, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. Outcome: Warning.

Operational lesson

Record details

New MexicoSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtD. New Mexico

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit10th Circuit

DateMay 26, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case.

False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiffs quoted 'Responses to objections are required unless the court orders otherwise' as from Gonzales, but the court found that language does not appear in the Tenth Circuit decision.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc?

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiffs cited 'Gonzales v. Qwest Commc’ns, 2005 WL 366290 (D. Colo.)' using a database identifier that does not appear attached to an existing case. Outcome: Warning.

Why does Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc?

Which source supports this Sample et al v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc 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.