AI in Florida Courts (2026): What Miami Lawyers and Clients Need to Know

Artificial intelligence is no longer theoretical in Florida courtrooms. Judges are issuing administrative orders governing AI use, the Florida Bar has released a formal ethics opinion, and courts nationwide are confronting fabricated citations, deepfake evidence, and AI-generated filings.

For business owners, insurers, developers, and litigants in Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and across Florida, the question is no longer whether AI is being used in litigation—but how it is regulated, disclosed, and supervised.

This guide explains how AI is currently treated in Florida courts, what rules apply in 2026, and how Almazan Law uses AI responsibly to protect client interests.

Can Florida Lawyers Use AI in Court? Yes—But They Remain Fully Responsible

Short answer: Yes.
Legal reality: The lawyer, and anyone proceeding pro se (without an attorney)—not the technology—remains 100% accountable.

In January 2024, the Florida Bar issued Ethics Opinion 24-1, which formally addressed generative AI use by Florida lawyers.

Key Guidance from Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 24-1

(Source: The Florida Bar, Ethics Opinion 24-1)

AI is permitted. The Bar confirmed there is “nothing inherently improper” about using AI for drafting, research, or analysis.
Confidentiality still governs. Lawyers must comply with Rule 4-1.6. If a third-party AI tool risks exposing confidential client information, informed client consent is required.
Competence and supervision are mandatory. Under Rules 4-1.1 and 4-5.3, lawyers must review, verify, and supervise AI output just as they would a nonlawyer assistant.
Fees must remain reasonable. Lawyers may not bill clients as if time-intensive work was performed when AI significantly reduced the effort (Rule 4-1.5).

Bottom line: AI can assist, but it cannot replace professional judgment or responsibility.

Do Florida Courts Require Disclosure of AI Use?

In some jurisdictions, yes.

Florida currently has a patchwork of local administrative orders, making disclosure obligations dependent on where your case is filed.

Miami-Dade County (11th Judicial Circuit)

(Source: Eleventh Judicial Circuit Administrative Orders)

Miami-Dade now requires attorneys and self-represented litigants to disclose the use of generative AI when it assists in preparing:

Pleadings
Motions
Memoranda
Responses
Proposed orders
Other court filings

The disclosure must appear on the face of the filing, along with a certification that the attorney verified the content and citations.

Broward County (17th Judicial Circuit)

(Source: Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Administrative Order 2026-03-Gen)

Broward’s order allows AI use for drafting, research, and discovery—but explicitly requires:

Human review of all AI-assisted content
Verification of legal citations and factual assertions
Safeguards for confidentiality and data handling

Other Florida circuits have issued similar guidance, prompting calls for statewide uniform standards.

How Is AI Actually Being Used in Florida Litigation?

When deployed correctly, AI is already improving efficiency in Florida litigation—especially in complex, document-heavy cases.

Common, Responsible Uses of AI

Document review and e-discovery: Identifying patterns, timelines, and key custodians across large datasets
Draft summaries: First-draft outlines of depositions or case law—always reviewed and revised by counsel
Research support: Surfacing potentially relevant authority faster, followed by traditional verification

The Florida Bar has consistently emphasized that AI’s value lies in efficiency gains, not automation of judgment.

What Are the Biggest AI Risks in Florida Courts?

Courts and ethics bodies are focused on three primary risk areas.

1. Fabricated Citations and “Hallucinated” Law

(Source: Federal and state court sanctions nationwide)

Courts across the U.S. have sanctioned attorneys for filing briefs citing cases that do not exist. Florida’s disclosure rules and Ethics Opinion 24-1 are designed to prevent this by reinforcing verification obligations.

2. Confidentiality and Data Security

Many AI tools are cloud-based and self-learning. Entering sensitive data into unsecured or public tools can create confidentiality risks—especially if that data is retained or reused.

Ethics Opinion 24-1 advises:

Avoiding public AI tools for confidential information
Using secure, vetted platforms
Obtaining informed consent when third-party tools are involved

3. Deepfakes and AI-Generated Evidence

(Source: Judicial commentary and emerging evidence scholarship)

AI-generated video, audio, and documents can fabricate presence, statements, or communications. While Florida evidence law already requires authentication and reliability, courts are increasingly scrutinizing:

Metadata
Chain of custody
Expert forensic testimony

Expect heightened challenges to digital evidence in 2026 and beyond.

What Should Florida Courts and Law Firms Do Next?

Legal leaders are converging around several priorities and need to act now if they have not already

1. Move Toward Uniform Statewide AI Rules

A single, statewide disclosure and verification framework would reduce confusion for multi-county practitioners and litigants.

2. Strengthen Digital Evidence Authentication

Courts may require:

Enhanced forensic review
Clearer protocols for synthetic media
Updates to Florida’s Evidence Code

3. Expand AI Literacy and Training

(Source: Florida Bar technology guidance)

Ongoing training is essential—for lawyers, judges, and clients—to understand AI’s capabilities and limits.

4. Require Written AI Policies Inside Law Firms

Ethics Opinion 24-1 strongly implies that firms should maintain written AI governance policies covering:

Approved tools
Data handling rules
Verification procedures
Client disclosures
Website chatbots and intake safeguards

What This Means for Miami and South Florida Clients

If you are a business owner, insurer, developer, association, or high-net-worth individual in South Florida, AI affects your case in three ways:

Speed and cost: Proper AI use can reduce timelines and expense
Risk: Improper use can introduce fake law or unreliable evidence
Choice of counsel: You need lawyers who understand AI well enough to use it safely

At Almazan Law, we treat AI as a power tool—not a decision-maker. Every argument, citation, and filing is reviewed, verified, and owned by an attorney.

Frequently Asked Questions: AI in Florida Courts (2026)

Q: Will AI replace lawyers or judges in Florida?
No. AI replaces repetitive tasks—not judgment. Florida ethics rules require lawyers to maintain full responsibility.

Q: Should I worry if my lawyer uses AI?
Ask questions, but don’t panic. When used under Ethics Opinion 24-1, AI can benefit clients.

Q: Can AI-generated audio or video be used as evidence?
Yes, but expect strict scrutiny for authenticity, reliability, and potential manipulation.

Q: Are Miami courts doing anything special about AI?
Yes. Miami-Dade requires disclosure of AI use in court filings, with verification certifications.

Need Guidance on AI, Evidence, or Ethics in a Florida Case?

If you have a matter pending in Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, or elsewhere in Florida, our team can:

Assess AI-related litigation risks
Explain applicable court orders and ethics rules
Build a strategy that uses technology responsibly

Contact Almazan Law to schedule a consultation and discuss how AI, evidence, and ethics intersect in your Florida case.