The referral goes to The Florida Bar or another appropriate disciplinary authority. Potential sanctions range from reprimands and fines to disbarment. The attorney's identity has not been publicly disclosed, though the court's order explicitly flagged the failure to explain the origin of the defective material.
Attorneys should note that this marks the first known federal appellate referral for suspected AI hallucination in legal citations. While Florida's state circuits have already imposed mandatory AI disclosure requirements and verification certifications, the Eleventh Circuit's action signals that federal courts view existing ethical obligations and Rule 11 provisions as sufficient to reach the same result. The decision follows a pattern established by cases like Mata v. Avianca and recent Second Circuit rulings, but escalates enforcement from warnings to formal discipline. Any attorney relying on generative AI for legal research faces mounting exposure under both local rules and general professional conduct standards.