USA

Hanson v. Nest Home Lending, LLC et al.

D. Colorado 28 November 2025
Party
Pro Se Litigant
AI Tool
Unidentified

Hallucinated Content

Fabricated

  1. 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).

  2. Case Law

    Complaint cites In re Medina, 2012 WL 1368983 (Bankr. D. Colo.); court found no results for that citation.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

False Quotes

  1. 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.

  2. Case Law

    Motion to Disqualify quotes material attributed to Cole v. Ruidoso Mun. Schs., but the quoted material is not present in that opinion.

Misrepresented

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.


Outcome

Struck FilingOrder for future filings to include certificateRequired contact with the Federal Pro Se Clinic

Notes

Order to Show Cause is here.


View source document →

Data from Damien Charlotin's AI Hallucination Cases Database.