Public trackerCorpus refreshed Oct 26, 2026 · Latest decision Oct 23, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Home/courts/D. Colorado
DCCOOther public body
Illustrated court-scope marker · not a courthouse photo
Source-linked corpus view

D. Colorado

D. Colorado appears in 19 of 2,215 public corpus records (0.9%). This page describes the recorded dataset, not an incidence rate, prevalence of AI use, or a prediction of future outcomes.

Matched records19
Corpus denominator2,215
Source linked100%
Latest trackedSep 30, 2026
Evidence-based answer

What kinds of legal AI issues and responses appear in D. Colorado?

AI Vortex currently links 19 source-linked public matters associated with D. Colorado. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (17), Fabricated or altered quotations (10) and Misrepresented authority (10). Recorded responses and outcomes include Warning or admonishment (8), Monetary sanction (4) and No adjudicated consequence recorded (3). Categories can overlap within the same matter, and these counts describe this public corpus rather than the overall behavior or sanction rate of the court.

Every count below links to the exact matching records. The linked source, subsequent docket history, and local procedural context remain controlling.

Leading issue signalFabricated authorities17 records
Leading recorded responseWarning or admonishment8 records
Known USD amounts$40,0004 known · 0 unquantified
Recorded date rangeMay 6, 2025through Sep 30, 2026
Observed issue mix

What problems appear in these records?

Issue categories can overlap within a single matter.

Recorded consequences

How did courts or authorities respond?

Response categories can overlap and do not imply that every matter ended in a sanction.

Participant context

Who appears in these matters?

Matter context

Which practice areas are represented?

Attribution status

How is AI involvement recorded?

Unspecified attribution is not evidence that a particular vendor was used.

Corpus evolution

When were these matters recorded?

Public records in this view

Showing the most recent 19 of 19 matching records.

Miller v. Colorado Department of RevenueD. Colorado · CO · No tool named in source
Sep 30, 2026
Garcia v. City of Monte Vista, Colorado et al.D. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Sep 29, 2026
Adams v. Matrix Providers Inc. et al.D. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Aug 27, 2026
Danielle Maloit v. Frank Daniel MaloitD. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jul 29, 2026
Tlingit Haida Tribal Business Corporation v. OnePromomD. Colorado · CO · Eve Legal
Jun 9, 2026
Y.S. v. John Doe, et al.D. Colorado · CO · No tool named in source
Jun 4, 2026
Coomer v. Lindell/MyPillow, Inc. (2)D. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
May 7, 2026
Jamie Lee Saunders v. Albertsons/Safeway, LLCD. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Apr 16, 2026
Labonte v. Bokf, et al.D. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Feb 10, 2026
Nonnie Berg v. United Airlines, Inc. (3)D. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Feb 6, 2026
Nonnie Berg v. United Airlines, Inc. (2)D. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Jan 28, 2026
Alzado-Lotz v. BockD. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Jan 16, 2026
Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al.D. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Nov 28, 2025
Y.S. v. John Doe et al.D. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Nov 19, 2025
Cotto v. United StatesD. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
Nov 17, 2025
Matthew Lewis v. Eagle County GovernmentD. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Nov 14, 2025
Nonnie Berg v. United Airlines, Inc. (1)D. Colorado · CO · AI (implied, unspecified)
Oct 30, 2025
Coomer v. Lindell/MyPillow, Inc. (1)D. Colorado · CO · Co-Pilot, Westlaw’s AI, Gemini, Grok, Claude, ChatGPT, Perplexity
Jul 7, 2025
Harris v. Take-Two Interactive SoftwareD. Colorado · CO · Unidentified
May 6, 2025
Open all matching records

Scope and limitation

This page groups existing structured public-record fields. For judges, the counts describe matters in which that person is recorded as a decision-maker; they do not establish a judge’s general practices or sanction rate. For every entity type, the view is not a comparison against unobserved proceedings.

Indexing and evidence status

This public entity profile is indexable and meets the evidence-depth baseline of at least 3 source-linked records.