June 30, 2026 (in 32 days): Colorado: AI Act (SB 24-205, as delayed by SB 25B-004) enforcement begins

Saunders v. Albertsons/Safeway, LLC

U.S. District Court, District of Colorado · D. Colo. · Colorado bar guidance

Pro-se party

Court sanction

Verified April 26, 2026

Citation
Saunders v. Albertsons/Safeway, LLC, No. 1:24-cv-00814-PAB-SBP, 2026 WL 1040465 (D. Colo. Apr. 16, 2026)
Decided
April 16, 2026

Summary

Pro se plaintiff Jamie Lee Saunders submitted a reply brief in support of her motion for expert costs that cited Lampe v. United States, 18 F. App'x 744 (10th Cir. 2001), a fictional AI-generated case. Defendant Safeway flagged the fabricated citation in an embedded motion to strike contained in its surreply, and Saunders acknowledged the error and apologized in a subsequent filing. United States Magistrate Judge Susan Prose declined to strike the underlying motion, finding the two-week filing delay caused no prejudice and accepting Saunders's apology, but warned her that future filings citing hallucinated cases may be stricken without further analysis.

AI tool:
Unspecified generative AI
This case summary is informational only. Verify the underlying opinion or order against the primary source before relying on it in any filing or client matter.

What sanction did the court impose?

No monetary sanction or formal discipline. Judge Prose issued an explicit on-the-record warning that any future filings relying on hallucinated cases "may result in [Saunders's] filings being stricken without further analysis." The court reached the merits of the underlying motion for expert costs and granted it in part.

Why does Saunders v. Albertsons/Safeway, LLC matter for law firms using AI?

Saunders is a reminder that hallucinated-citation incidents are not confined to lawyers: pro se litigants increasingly use generative AI for brief drafting, and opposing counsel is now actively scanning for fabricated authority and raising it in surreplies. For a managing partner, the operational takeaway is that even a one-line warning footnote, with no monetary sanction, creates a published, Westlaw-indexed record tying the litigant’s name to AI hallucination, a reputational outcome the firm’s malpractice carrier will count among its loss-prevention data points.

Sources

Further reading

Source PDF is a Westlaw printout mirrored from the Damien Charlotin hallucination database. We are working to add the underlying court docket (PACER, CourtListener, or court website) as a second source.