Background
Florida’s circuit courts had responded piecemeal to the growing use of generative AI tools in litigation by issuing varied administrative orders requiring attorneys and self-represented litigants to disclose AI use and certify the accuracy of cited authorities. That patchwork created uncertainty and inconsistency across jurisdictions. The Florida Supreme Court acted on its own motion to replace those disparate orders with a single, statewide rule amendment.
The impetus was the well-documented risk that large language models and similar generative AI systems can produce citations to legal authorities that appear legitimate but do not exist — so-called “hallucinated” citations. Courts nationwide have sanctioned attorneys who submitted briefs containing fabricated case references generated by AI tools, and the Florida Supreme Court moved to address the problem uniformly before it became more widespread in Florida’s courts.
The Court’s Holding
The Court amended Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d)(2) to add a fourth representation that every signer of a court filing must make: that “the legal authorities identified exist and are accurately cited.” The requirement applies equally to filings by licensed attorneys and by unrepresented parties. The amendment took effect June 15, 2026.
The amended rule also adds an express sanctions provision authorizing courts, on their own motion or a party’s motion, to impose sanctions for any filing inconsistent with the new representation, provided the signer receives notice and an opportunity to be heard. Available sanctions include reprimand, contempt, striking of the document, dismissal of the proceedings, costs, attorneys’ fees, or other appropriate sanctions. The accompanying court commentary clarifies that the new express sanctions provision was included to avoid uncertainty — not to limit courts’ pre-existing sanctioning authority under the rules generally.
Key Takeaways
- Every signer of a Florida court filing — attorney or pro se — must now affirmatively represent that all cited legal authorities actually exist and are accurately cited.
- Courts may sanction filers whose submissions contain fabricated or inaccurate citations, including through reprimand, contempt, dismissal, or fee-shifting, after notice and an opportunity to be heard.
- The amendment supersedes the varied AI-disclosure administrative orders that individual circuit courts had issued, establishing a uniform statewide standard.
- Interested persons have until August 11, 2026 to file comments with the Court; the amendments are already effective as of June 15, 2026 notwithstanding any motion for rehearing.
Why It Matters
This amendment is among the first statewide rule changes in the country to directly target AI-generated citation hallucinations as a systemic threat to the integrity of court filings. By embedding the accuracy-of-citations obligation into the signature rule itself — rather than leaving it to ad hoc judicial orders — Florida creates a bright-line, enforceable duty that applies in every court and every case, eliminating the jurisdictional inconsistency that had developed across circuits.
For practitioners, the practical message is clear: using AI to research or draft court papers does not transfer the responsibility to verify citations. Attorneys who file AI-assisted briefs without independently confirming that every cited case or statute exists and is accurately quoted now face the full range of rule-based sanctions. The rule’s explicit coverage of unrepresented parties is also notable, signaling that courts intend to hold all filers — not just lawyers — to this standard of accuracy.