05/29/2026
The Florida Supreme Court just amended the rules to address the use of AI in court filings by requiring, "the signer of a filing to represent that the legal authorities identified in that filing ‘exist and are accurately cited."
My first reaction was that lawyers have always been responsible for what they file with the court. Verifying that cases actually exist, making sure citations are accurate, and confirming that the law is current has never been optional.
In some ways, it's a little disappointing that we need a rule specifically addressing AI-generated hallucinations. But given the number of stories we've seen about attorneys filing pleadings with nonexistent cases, I understand why the Court felt the need to act.
This rule is also aimed at the growing number of self-represented litigants using AI to prepare motions, pleadings, and other filings. AI can be a tremendous tool, but it can also confidently provide incorrect information. The new rule gives courts a clearer framework for addressing those situations when they arise through the ability to impose sanctions or strike pleadings.
The bigger lesson remains the same whether you're a lawyer, business owner, or everyday AI user: AI is a powerful assistant, but it still requires human judgment and verification. Have to keep the human in the loop.
Trust, but verify.