TL;DR:
On May 28, 2026 the Florida Supreme Court approved SC2026-0673, amending Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d)(2) to require the signer of any court filing to represent that the legal authorities cited exist and are accurately cited. The amendment takes effect June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. Florida courts may sanction filings that contain fabricated or inaccurately cited authorities, including AI-generated content. This creates a uniform statewide standard for every Florida court, with sanctions and enforcement clearly spelled out. Practicing trial lawyers in Florida should implement a rigorous citation-verification workflow, update signing practices, and consider integrating AI-assisted research tools only as a supplement to careful human vetting. Objection Academy's training modules can help teams rehearse compliance, including objection-ready workflows for AI-related citations and evidence authentication.
Background and scope of the change
Florida’s highest court moved decisively to address the rising use of generative AI in court filings by expanding the representation required when signing court documents. The Administrative Order accompanying SC2026-0673 explains that the amendments to Rule 2.515(d)(2) require the signer of a filing to represent that the legal authorities identified in the filing exist and are accurately cited. This statewide reform seeks to replace patchwork, circuit-level controls with a uniform standard across Florida’s courts, reducing the risk of “hallucinated” or fabricated authorities entering the record. The formal order notes that courts may impose sanctions for any filing that is inconsistent with the signer’s representation. The Florida Supreme Court’s Administrative Order No. AOSC26-12 memorializes these changes and clarifies the effective date, stating that the amendments take effect on June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. (flcourts-media.flcourts.gov)
Crucially, the May 28, 2026 action is tied to a modernization effort aimed at AI in court filings. The Florida Bar summarized the rule change as expanding the signer’s representation to include that the identified authorities exist and are accurately cited, with explicit sanctions for noncompliance. The rule change is intended to create a uniform statewide approach and to curb the risk posed by AI-generated citations that look plausible but are not real. The Florida Bar’s coverage confirms the notable shift from varied circuit practices to a single statewide standard. (floridabar.org)
Primary authority for practitioners is the Florida Supreme Court’s Administrative Order No. AOSC26-12, which explicitly ties the amendments to SC2026-0673 (May 28, 2026) and provides the effective date. The order states that courts may impose sanctions for filings inconsistent with the representation required by the amended rule and clarifies that the amendments supersede local or circuit-level AI-disclosure regimes. The official order further directs that the change go into effect June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. and allows room for comments, but it creates a statewide baseline immediately upon effectiveness. (flcourts-media.flcourts.gov)
What this means for trial attorneys in Florida
Sanctions risk increases for inaccurate authorities. Filings signed under Rule 2.515(d)(2) now carry an express representation about the existence and accuracy of cited authorities. Sanctions can include reprimand, contempt, striking of the filing, dismissal, or fees, among others. This heightens stakes for post-filing corrections and for any AI-assisted drafting that might introduce hallucinated sources. (flcourts-media.flcourts.gov)
AI usage is no longer a badge of convenience. While AI tools can speed research and drafting, the signer bears ultimate responsibility for accuracy. The amendments explicitly shift the risk of mis-citations onto the filer, reinforcing the need for demonstrable verification steps before signing. The Florida Bar notes the balance the court sought: embrace technology while preserving professional responsibility. (floridabar.org)
A standardized workflow is essential. Uniform statewide rules reduce inconsistent practices, but they also require robust internal controls. Trial teams should implement a formal citation-verification process, maintain auditable records of authorities located, verify citations against official sources, and ensure that any quoted language is accurate. Teams may also need to adjust training to ensure all signers understand their certification obligations.
The practical nuance for litigators. The rule emphasizes the existence and accuracy of authorities, not necessarily the entire provenance of AI-assisted drafting. Attorneys should consider marking sections where AI contributed, but the certification itself focuses on the end product—the cited authorities. This means a practical approach involves rigorous post-AI review and a clean certification that can stand up to scrutiny if a filing is challenged. (floridabar.org)
Practical steps to achieve compliance
Build a citation-verification checklist. Create a concise, repeatable process that confirms each authority cited actually exists, is correctly cited, and supports the proposition stated. Cross-check with official databases (state and federal reporters, court websites, and statutory compilations). Document the verification steps and keep copies of source materials.
Standardize the signer’s certification language. Develop a boilerplate statement that can be affixed to filings where the signer attests that authorities exist and are accurately cited. Ensure the language aligns with Rule 2.515(d)(2) and the Florida Administrative Order. This reduces the risk of ambiguity at the time of signing.
Train the team with Objection Academy tools. Objection Academy can be used to drill scenarios that test the reliability of AI-assisted research, including challenges to authenticity of authorities and the proper handling of objections when a cited authority is later challenged. Training modules focused on evidence foundations and the courtroom application of authorities help attorneys practice the exact skills now demanded by the Florida standard.
Establish an AI-augmented workflow with safeguards. If AI tools are used for research or drafting, pair them with a dedicated reviewer who verifies every cited authority. Maintain an auditable trail showing the verification process, the authority’s existence, and the accuracy of the citation. This approach aligns with the intent of the new statewide rule and helps prevent sanctions.
Prepare for enforcement in Florida courts. Anticipate sanctions for noncompliance and develop ready-to-respond plans if a filing is challenged for inaccuracies. This includes having ready amendments or motions to strike inaccurate authorities, and a quick path to refile if necessary.
How Objection Academy supports trial teams under the new regime
Objection Academy offers a practical platform for strengthening courtroom objections and evidence literacy at scale. In the context of the new Florida standard, OA can:
- Provide focused drills on authenticating authorities and handling objections to questionable sources, reinforcing the habit of verifying every citation before signing.
- Simulate real-world trial scenarios where AI-assisted drafting is used, allowing attorneys to practice presenting reliable authorities and addressing opposing counsel’s challenges about citations.
- Offer evidence-specific training tracks that align with Rule 2.515(d)(2) under Florida law, emphasizing the importance of accurate citations in persuasive advocacy and in the adversary’s attempts to undermine the record.
- Deliver MCLE-aligned modules for trial teams, enhancing readiness to respond to sanctions risk and ensuring that the team maintains a high standard of citation integrity.
Final take and actionable plan
The Florida Supreme Court’s SC2026-0673 reform marks a pivotal shift in how trial teams prepare and file documents in Florida courts. By making the signer responsible for the existence and accuracy of cited authorities, the rule elevates the importance of meticulous citation verification and places a premium on reliable, auditable workflows. For practitioners, the path forward is clear: update signing practices, implement a rigorous verification process, and train teams to navigate AI-assisted drafting without compromising accuracy. Objection Academy can be a valuable partner in building this culture of courtroom readiness, turning theoretical compliance into practical, repeatable performance.
Sources:
- Supreme Court of Florida Administrative Order No. AOSC26-12, In Re: Representations By Signers Of Filings, May 28, 2026, effective June 15, 2026. (flcourts-media.flcourts.gov)
- Florida Supreme Court SC2026-0673 (May 28, 2026) amendments to Rule 2.515(d)(2) and accompanying commentary. (floridabar.org)
- The Florida Bar, Supreme Court amends rules to address AI use in court filings, May 29, 2026. (floridabar.org)
- Seventeenth Judicial Circuit (Broward) Administrative Order 2026-03-GEN (Amendment 2) Use of AI in Court Filings, May 2026. (17th.flcourts.org)