Published opinion, 13 May 2026 · source · PDF · 2 pages
Gleason's apparent use of artificial intelligence to prepare the briefs he filed with this court. His briefs cite numerous cases that do not exist, and they frequently quote case law for propositions that appear nowhere in the cases cited. 2 We have cautioned on the dangers of using generative artificial intelligence before, see, e.g., Russell v.
3d 1185, 1187–88 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024) (sanctioning pro se litigant for citing multiple nonexistent cases in his appellate briefs). We notify Mr.
6th DCA Mar. 20, 2026) ("If and when any such erroneous filings [containing nonexistent cases or inaccurate legal propositions] are made . . . , filers on the opposite side of the case should point out such errors . . . in their responsive filings or via motion."); Noland v. Land of the Free, L.P., 336 Cal.
App. 2025) (denying sanctions payable to opponents who "did not alert the court to the fabricated citations" and awarding sanctions payable to the court instead). KELLY, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and LABRIT, JJ., Concur.