KINGS ROOFING NWFL, LLC
v.
FUSION WORKS CONSTRUCTION, LLC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An appeal may be dismissed by joint stipulation while the court retains jurisdiction to sanction counsel for filing briefs containing citations to non-existent or inaccurately cited cases.
[1] Counsel who submits appellate briefs containing citations to non-existent cases or cases cited for inaccurate legal propositions, particularly when drafted with generativ…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The Initial Brief looks as if it was drafted with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence without Mr. McCommon having put sufficient safeguards in place to ensure the existence or accuracy of the cases cited therein.”
Court's explanation for retaining jurisdiction to pursue sanctions against appellant's counsel.
Kings Roofing NWFL, LLC appealed a county court decision against Fusion Works Construction, LLC. The appellant's counsel submitted an Initial Brief co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sanctions For Frivolous Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 6D2025-1251 Lower Tribunal No. 2024-CC-008662
KINGS ROOFING NWFL, LLC, Appellant,
v.
FUSION WORKS CONSTRUCTION, LLC, Appellee.
Appeal from the County Court for Lee County. Nicole Lynn Mirra, Judge.
May 22, 2026
ON JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL
Pursuant to the parties' Joint Stipulation for Dismissal of Appeal docketed April 22, 2026, this appeal is hereby dismissed. Fla. R. App. P. 9.350(c).
However, we expressly retain jurisdiction to pursue any possible sanctions against Steven R. McCommon, Esquire, who, in his Initial Brief, has provided this Court with citations to several cases, some of which appear to be fabricated. The Initial Brief looks as if it was drafted with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence without Mr. McCommon having put sufficient safeguards in place to ensure the existence or accuracy of the cases cited therein. This is unfortunately not the first time our Court has encountered a filing with citations to cases that do not exist or to cases that are cited for inaccurate legal propositions. See, e.g., Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, No. 6D2025-3086, 2026 WL 969721 (Fla. 6th DCA Apr. 10, 2026).
As we did in Rodriguez, we hereby direct Mr. McCommon to provide copies of each and every case cited in the Initial Brief that actually exists, with highlighted quotations or language that support the assertions made in the Initial Brief. These cases shall be filed with this Court within ten days of the issuance of this Order. Additionally, Mr. McCommon is directed to show cause within ten days of the issuance of this Order: (1) why he should not be sanctioned for filing an initial brief that contains non-existent cases and that cites to cases for inaccurate legal propositions; and (2) why he should not be referred to The Florida Bar for potential discipline.
DISMISSED. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ISSUED.
NARDELLA, WOZNIAK and GANNAM, JJ., concur.
Steven R. McCommon, of S.R. McCommon Law PLLC, St. Petersburg, for Appellant.
Robert L. Shearin, of Law Office of Robert L. Shearin, Boca Raton, for Appellee.