From Wednesday's decision by Florida Court of Appeal Justice Gross in Lisandrillo v. Palozzi, joined by Justice Robert Gross, joined by Justices Spencer Levine and Caroline Shepherd:
We deny the extraordinary writ petition seeking review in this dissolution of marriage case and write solely to address counsel's filing of what appears to be "AI slop." Counsel's lengthy and unfocused filings contain gibberish and abuse the litigation process in different ways—including by churning out convoluted, false, and frivolous arguments.
{The AI slop problem we address here has nothing to do with hallucinated law or false legal citations.
The citations are real. The cases exist. The language is confident. Yet the analytical reasoning—or lack of it—reveals that the arguments were assembled by an AI tool rather than developed through a trained advocate's independent judgment.
Jodi Swick & Jarrett Ganer, AI Slop Filings Show Lawyers Must Do More Than Check Citations, Bloomberg Law (January 26, 2026, 4:30 AM). We agree that AI-drafting without meaningful attorney involvement "undermines the very premise of qualified legal representation."}
We suspect that counsel's filings contain AI-generated components. {Ironically, while some of the content appears AI-generated, other portions appear too unpolished to have been produced by AI.} Abusive AI filing threatens the orderly administration of justice. We have recently sanctioned vexatious pro se litigants for abusive AI filings. Courts must require more from attorneys and not tolerate abusive practice fueled by AI….
For more details on why the court thinks "[t]he filings contain indicia of non-human authorship," read the (longish) opinion. Just a few small excerpts:
