In re Amendments to Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.530 & 2.540 — Florida Supreme Court adopts ADA notice updates, declines remote-deposition rule change

Case
In Re: Amendments to Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.530 and 2.540
Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Judge
Muñiz (Ron DeSantis, 2019); Labarga (Charlie Crist, 2009)
Date Decided
May 14, 2026
Docket No.
SC2025-0725
Topics
Court Rules, ADA Accommodations, Remote Depositions, Judicial Administration
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The Florida Bar’s Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration Committee filed a report proposing amendments to two court rules: Rule 2.530, governing the use of communication technology (including audio-visual technology for depositions), and Rule 2.540, governing requests for accommodations by persons with disabilities. The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar unanimously recommended adoption of both proposed amendments. The Court published the proposals for public comment, and no comments were received.

The proposed amendment to Rule 2.530 concerned the use of audio-visual communication technology during depositions. The proposed amendments to Rule 2.540 were largely technical and clarifying in nature, addressing which court notices must carry ADA accommodation language, updating the required font specifications, and modernizing the contact reference in the required notice text.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Supreme Court declined to adopt the proposed amendment to Rule 2.530 at this time. Instead, the Court referred the issue of audio-visual communication technology during depositions to the Civil Procedure Rules Committee, directing it to consider proposing an amendment to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.310 (Depositions on Oral Examination), the rule more directly governing deposition practice.

The Court did adopt the proposed amendments to Rule 2.540 in full. The amendments clarify that the ADA notice requirement applies to all notices of court proceedings — whether issued by a judge or filed by an attorney or party — including but not limited to a summons. The required font for the ADA notice statement was changed from Times New Roman or Courier to Bookman Old Style or Arial. The notice language was also updated to refer generically to an “ADA Coordinator” rather than identifying a specific individual by name. The amendments take effect July 1, 2026.

Key Takeaways

  • The Court declined to amend Rule 2.530 on audio-visual deposition technology and instead redirected that question to the Civil Procedure Rules Committee for potential amendment of Rule 1.310.
  • All court notices — whether judicial orders or attorney/party filings, including summonses — must now carry the ADA accommodation statement, removing any prior ambiguity about which documents trigger the requirement.
  • The mandatory font for the bold-face ADA notice statement changes from Times New Roman or Courier to Bookman Old Style or Arial, effective July 1, 2026.
  • The ADA notice text must now reference the court’s “ADA Coordinator” rather than a named individual, making notices easier to keep current as personnel change.

Why It Matters

For Florida practitioners, the Rule 2.540 amendments impose a concrete compliance obligation: starting July 1, 2026, every notice of a court proceeding and every summons must include the updated ADA statement in the newly specified fonts and with the revised coordinator reference. Attorneys who use templated notices, summonses, or form orders will need to update those templates before the effective date to avoid noncompliance.

The Court’s handling of the Rule 2.530 proposal is also significant. By routing the audio-visual deposition question to the Civil Procedure Rules Committee rather than acting on it directly through the general administration rules, the Court signaled that the appropriate home for remote-deposition standards is the civil procedure framework — a distinction that may shape how future proposals on technology use in litigation are structured and submitted.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top