Nineteenth Circuit — AO 2025-10 required face-of-document AI disclosure and certification [RESCINDED eff. June 15, 2026] · BenchPath

Nineteenth Circuit — AO 2025-10 required face-of-document AI disclosure and certification [RESCINDED eff. June 15, 2026]

High confidence· verified July 26, 2026Administrative Orders19th Cir. Admin. Order 2025-10, In re: Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings (2025); rescinded by AO 2026-06 (2026)

Summary

Administrative Order 2025-10 (Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings) required any filing drafted in whole or in part with AI to carry a clear disclosure on the face of the document and a certification that citations were verified, with sanctions up to striking the filing, fees and costs, contempt, mandatory CLE, and Bar referral, applying equally to pro se litigants. RESCINDED by AO 2026-06 effective June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. — the exact AOSC26-12 preemption moment. Tracked as history; no filer must comply. NOTE: the court's AO search facet still labels 2025-10 "Active" — a metadata error preserved in a review task; the rescission order controls.

Applies to

HISTORICAL. Rescinded circuit-wide by AO 2026-06; preempted by AOSC26-12 and amended Rule 2.515(d)(2) (SC2026-0673). The court hosts the order at two URLs with different bytes (canonical 2025/09 upload sha 65f12ffb…; "_A2b" variant sha bbefe28a…) — both in BenchPath custody.

Requirement

Verbatim from the operative section of this order, re-extracted 2026-07-26; whitespace normalised only. • Disclosure Requirement Any filing drafted in whole or in part with the assistance of AI technology must contain a clear disclosure on the face of the document specifying AI technology was used (e.g., drafting, editing, citing, cite-checking).1 • Certification Requirement Each such filing must also include a certification that the attorney of record (or pro se litigant) has personally reviewed the filing and verified the accuracy of all factual statements, legal arguments, and case citations in substantial conformity with Exhibit A attached hereto. • Responsibility of Counsel Attorneys remain fully responsible for their work product and must comply with all obligations under the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, including but not limited to 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 (Nonlawyer Supervision). • Sanctions for Non-Compliance Failure to comply with this Order, including failure to disclose or certify, or the submission of AI-generated false or misleading content, may result in sanctions, including but not limited to: • striking pleadings, filings, or dismissing actions; • monetary fines; • imposition of attorneys’ fees and costs; • contempt sanctions; • mandatory continuing legal education in ethics or technology; • referral to The Florida Bar for disciplinary proceedings. The determination of appropriate sanctions shall be within the discretion of the presiding judge, based on the circumstances of each case.

Source of truth

Disclosure Requirement Any filing drafted in whole or in part with the assistance of AI technology must contain a clear disclosure on the face of the document specifying AI technology was used (e.g., drafting, editing, citing, cite-checking).1

Official source: 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org)
Source health: Healthy · checked September 7, 2026
Effective date: —
Last verified: July 26, 2026benchpath-reextract-2026-07-26

Reviewer note: | 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.

Change history

August 5, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
August 4, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
August 3, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
July 28, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
July 27, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
July 26, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.
July 25, 2026Monitor: content changed at 19th Circuit — Administrative Orders (circuit19.org). Review before republishing dependent rules.

4th Cir. — AO 1986-33A Amended Administrative Order No. 86-33 Compensation for Court Appointed Attorneys in Crimi

2 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1986-33A.

High confidence· verified August 3, 2026Fourth Judicial Circuit Administrative Order 1986-33A, filed 05/12/1988, published on the Duval Clerk's administrative-orders store — sha256-hashed 2026-08-03

Administrative OrdersFourth Judicial Circuit

4th Cir. — AO 1987-09 Administrative Order 87-09 Court Reporters - Requests for Transcripts

1 verbatim requirement from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1987-09.

High confidence