Loading…
Broward's circuit-wide AI disclosure/certification mandate (AO 2026-03-GEN, Amendment 2, entered May 19, 2026) was VACATED in its entirety by AO 2026-19-Gen effective June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. — the same moment statewide preemption (AOSC26-12 / Rule 2.515(d)(2)) took effect. Corrected 2026-07-21 from a prior erroneous "unrescinded holdout" status after re-fetching the primary source.
Verbatim from the operative section of this order, re-extracted 2026-07-26; whitespace normalised only. • AI Use or Assistance: AI may be used to assist in preparation, researching, drafting pleadings, review of pleadings, drafting documents, review of documents, filing documents, review of discovery and preparation of requests for discovery. All information generated by AI must have appropriate human oversight that includes checking citations, verifying factual claims, and analyzing conclusions. All those using Page 2 of 4 AI must guard against including, but not limited to, potential plagiarism, confidentiality breaches, inaccurate information, false information, hallucinations, and the use of inappropriate language. • Attorney Responsibility: An attorney may use AI technologies but only to the extent that the lawyer can reasonably guarantee compliance with the lawyer’s ethical obligations. Attorneys must be fully responsible for their work product and must comply with Florida law and the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, including Rule 4-1.1 (Competence), Rule 4-1.6 (Confidentiality), Rule 4-3.3 (Candor to Tribunal), Rule 4-5.1 (Supervision), and Rule 4-5.3 (Non-lawyer Supervision). (See In Re: Amendments to Rules Regulating the Florida Bar – Chapter 4, No. SC2024-0032 (Aug. 29, 2024), and Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 24-1 (Jan. 19, 2024)). • Pro se Litigants Responsibility: Pro se litigants using AI must be aware of the technology’s propensity to generate fictitious legal authorities and must ensure such citations do not appear in any court filing. Pro se litigants are required to follow the same procedural rules as attorneys and must be prepared to accept the consequences of any nondisclosure, procedural mistakes, inaccurate information, false facts, AI (digital) hallucinations, and/or legal error. • Confidentiality and Authenticity: Attorneys and pro se litigants must use their best efforts to verify the authenticity of information obtained by them using AI if there is a reasonable basis to question the authenticity of the information and have produced inaccurate information, legal error, and/or AI (digital) hallucinations. The AI tools for legal research, drafting documents, and assisting in the discovery process must be consistent with Florida law, court rules of procedure, the rules governing professional responsibilities, and the obligation to protect confidential information. • Certification: Any attorney or pro se litigant submitting a filing or submission where generative artificial intelligence was used to draft or prepare such filing, must include a certification that they have personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy, specifically regarding factual statements, legal arguments, and case citations. All filings or submissions containing AI-generated content must disclose the use of AI in the document, pleading, and/or filing and must confirm the accuracy and reliability of the work by including the following, The undersigned hereby certifies that generative artificial intelligence was used in the preparation of this submission. The undersigned certifies that s/he has read and verified the accuracy of every citation to the law and/or the record, and the accuracy of any language drafted by the generative artificial intelligence, including quotations, citations, paraphrased assertions, facts, and legal analysis, and accepts full responsibility for the contents of this submission. This certification may be included at the conclusion of the submission or immediately above the signature block. • Prohibited Conduct: The following conduct is prohibited: submission of fictitious, fabricated, or hallucinated legal authority, statutes, quotations, or facts; reliance on AI-generated citations without personal verification; or failure to disclose the use of AI as required by this Order. Page 4 of 4
AI Use or Assistance: AI may be used to assist in preparation, researching, drafting pleadings, review of pleadings, drafting documents, review of documents, filing documents, review of discovery and preparation of requests for discovery. All information generated by AI must have appropriate human oversight that includes checking citations, verifying factual claims, and analyzing conclusions. All those using Page 2 of 4 AI must guard against including, but not limited to, potential plagiarism, confidentiality breaches, inaccurate information, false information, hallucinations, and the use of inappropriate language.
Reviewer note: LARGEST preempted-but-posted holdout in Florida: a circuit-wide OWN-MANDATE surviving unrescinded. superseded_by → fl-rja-2-515-authorities-exist. Weekly watch for rescission/removal. | Set to in_review 2026-07-26: the order's subject looks practitioner-facing but the extracted text captured only recitals or an effective date, not the operative ORDERED section. This is an extraction defect, not a judgement that the order is unimportant — it needs re-extraction before it goes back on the published surface. | Re-extracted 2026-07-26 from the numbered paragraphs following the order's ORDERED clause, replacing a first pass that had captured recitals and the effective date.
2 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1986-33A.
1 verbatim requirement from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1987-09.