In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515

Supreme Court of Florida
____________

No. SC2026-0673
____________

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF GENERAL
PRACTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.515.

May 28, 2026

PER CURIAM.

On its own motion, the Court amends Florida Rule of General

Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d)(2) (Representation by

Signer) to require the signer of a document filed with Florida’s

courts to represent that “the legal authorities identified exist and

are accurately cited.” 1 The amendment also expressly authorizes

courts to impose appropriate sanctions for “any filing inconsistent

with” the representation a signer makes under rule 2.515(d)(2).

Generative artificial intelligence tools—including large

language models and other systems that produce text or citations in

1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.; see
also Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.140(d).
response to prompts—are being used as drafting or research aids

for court filings. Though these tools can be helpful, they also can

generate content that appears plausible but is in fact inaccurate,

including fabricated or “hallucinated” authorities.

Given the demonstrated risks of generative AI and to promote

the accuracy and integrity of court filings, we amend rule

2.515(d)(2) to require the signer of a filing to represent that the legal

authorities identified in that filing “exist and are accurately cited.”

This requirement applies both to filings prepared by attorneys and

to filings prepared by unrepresented parties. We also amend rule

2.515(d)(2) to provide that the court may “impose sanctions for any

filing inconsistent with this representation after providing the signer

notice and an opportunity to be heard.” And we amend rule

2.515(d)(2) to specify that “[s]uch sanctions may include reprimand,

contempt, striking of the document, dismissal of proceedings, costs,

attorneys’ fees, or other sanctions.” The accompanying court

commentary explains that the Court adopted these amendments

“principally to create a statewide, uniform replacement for varied

circuit court administrative orders imposing disclosure and

certification requirements about the use of artificial intelligence in

-2-
filings” and that the new, express sanctions provision in rule

2.515(d)(2) is not intended “to change or comment on (by negative

implication or otherwise) courts’ existing authority to impose

sanctions for noncompliance with these rules generally.”

The Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial

Administration are hereby amended as reflected in the appendix to

this opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions

are indicated by struck-through type. The amendments shall

become effective June 15, 2026, at 12:01 a.m. Because the

amendments were not published for comment previously, interested

persons shall have 75 days from the date of this opinion in which to

file comments with the Court. 2

2. All comments must be filed with the Court on or before
August 11, 2026, as well as a separate request for oral argument if
the person filing the comment wishes to participate in oral
argument, which may be scheduled in this case. If filed by an
attorney in good standing with The Florida Bar, the comment must
be electronically filed via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal (Portal).
If filed by a nonlawyer or a lawyer not licensed to practice in
Florida, the comment may be, but is not required to be, filed via the
Portal. Any person unable to submit a comment electronically must
mail or hand-deliver the originally signed comment to the Florida
Supreme Court, Office of the Clerk, 500 South Duval Street,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399; no additional copies are required or will
be accepted.

-3-
It is so ordered.

MUÑIZ, C.J., and LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS,
SASSO, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.

THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER
THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.

Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial
Administration

-4-
APPENDIX

RULE 2.515. SIGNATURE AND REPRESENTATIONS TO COURT
(a)-(c) [No Change]

(d) Representation to Court.

(1) [No Change]

(2) Representation by Signer. On filing, each signer
represents that:

(A) the signer has read the document;

(B) to the best of the signer’s knowledge,
information, and belief, there are good grounds to support the
document; and

(C) the document is not interposed for delay; and

(D) the legal authorities identified exist and are
accurately cited.

The Court may, on its own motion or the motion of a party, impose
sanctions for any filing inconsistent with this representation after
providing the signer notice and an opportunity to be heard. Such
sanctions may include reprimand, contempt, striking of the
document, dismissal of proceedings, costs, attorneys’ fees, or other
sanctions.

(3) [No Change]

Court Commentary

2026 Amendment. The Court adopted the 2026 amendments
to subdivision (d)(2) principally to create a statewide, uniform
replacement for varied circuit court administrative orders imposing
disclosure and certification requirements about the use of artificial

-5-
intelligence in filings. Those circuit court administrative orders
included sanctions provisions. The Court included an express
sanctions provision in amended subdivision (d)(2) to avoid
uncertainty over courts’ continuing authority to impose sanctions in
this context, as provided for in the circuit court administrative
orders that have been replaced. By including an express sanctions
provision in amended subdivision (d)(2), the Court does not intend
to change or comment on (by negative implication or otherwise)
courts’ existing authority to impose sanctions for noncompliance
with these rules generally.

-6-