JMOR Properties, LLC v. Artist Alley Townhomes, LLC

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

Counsel filed a certiorari petition in this case that is riddled with false citations and arguments, including an unsupported allegation that this Court has “repeatedly entertained, and granted, certiorari review of orders vacating clerk’s defaults.” The petition cited a non-existent case allegedly from this Court and cited other cases that do not support this proposition. ... Counsel’s response acknowledges the false citations identified in our order and identifies additional false citations. Counsel accepts responsibility for his deficient filing but alleges that he did not mean to mislead this Court and merely submitted the wrong draft. Counsel explains that his normal process is to have artificial intelligence (“AI”) software research and draft the initial document, and he then verifies every citation and revises the draft. Counsel allegedly did that in this case and removed all the fake and false citations, but while he was making final edits, he inadvertently worked from the wrong version and ended up filing the AI’s initial draft with this Court. ... Thus, counsel’s petition misrepresented the law and cited non-existent authority for the opposite proposition. ... Accordingly, we refer this matter to the Florida Bar for consideration of disciplinary proceedings.

Authorities cited in the passage: Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.515(d)(2) · Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) · Leibman v. Sportatorium, Inc., 374 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) · Eclectic Synergy, LLC v. Seredin, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D1061 (Fla. 4th DCA May 27, 2026) · Hessert v. Hessert, 431 So. 3d 610 (Fla. 6th DCA 2026) · Russell v. Mells, 426 So. 3d 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 2025) · R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.1 · R. Regulating Fla. Bar 3-7.18