An appellate court in Florida is weighing sanctions against a family-law attorney after she filed a 41-page omnibus motion that, according to a Reuters report cited by Above the Law, contained at least 14 separate issues and showed signs of "AI slop" — gibberish and convoluted, frivolous arguments. The court ordered the attorney to show cause why she should not be penalized.
Her response was an 84-page filing, roughly twice as long as the original motion. In it, she stressed that none of her citations were hallucinated. But as Above the Law notes, that missed the point: the court had asked her to demonstrate that she had done quality legal work, and the dense, lengthy reply instead suggested the opposite.
The episode is not an example of AI creating new problems in the legal profession, the article argues, but of AI revealing existing ones. A decision on sanctions is still pending.