Bruno Roberto Rodriguez v. Kathryn Louise Rodriguez
CA Florida (6d) · Apr 10, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- state
- Court
- CA Florida (6d)
- Record ID
- bruno-roberto-rodriguez-v-kathryn-louise-rodriguez-2026-04-10
- Observed outcome
- Petition dismissed; Order to Show Cause issued against counsel.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court dismissed the petition and issued an order to show cause requiring the attorney to justify the inclusion of non-existent and mischaracterized case law, and to explain why she should not face sanctions or a referral to the Florida Bar for potential disciplinary action.
The court reasoned that attorneys have an ethical duty to verify the existence and accuracy of all cited authorities, regardless of whether generative AI was used in the drafting process. It adopted the reasoning from Hessert v. Hessert, asserting that courts have the authority and duty to maintain the integrity of proceedings and safeguard the legal profession by sanctioning or referring counsel who fail to perform basic cite-checking.
Verify every cited case exists and supports the exact proposition before filing a petition.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Case Law
- Misrepresented Legal Authority
- Lack Of Human Verification
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Other
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- Generative artificial intelligence
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court dismissed the petition for writ of certiorari and issued an order to show cause directed at the petitioner's counsel.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court identified the use of generative artificial intelligence.
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.