On the one hand, such citations are subject to sanctions rules/motions like Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and Florida Statutes ยง 57.105.
But why give the opponent an opportunity to withdraw? I like spending the time to meticulously call out their BS and slop. Once the other side is shown to have filed slop once, its credibility is destroyed for the rest of the case. As a bonus, the court might issue, sua sponte, an order to show cause why sanctions ought not be imposed anyway.
But say the client is very cost-sensitive. There, one can still make a bullet-point list of all the cases cited, placing them under the heading "Cases that Do Not Exist" or similar.
The court should get the idea.
Obligatory disclaimer: this shouldn't be construed as legal advice; it's just part of my thought process regarding the OP's hypothetical.
On the one hand, such citations are subject to sanctions rules/motions like Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and Florida Statutes ยง 57.105.
But why give the opponent an opportunity to withdraw? I like spending the time to meticulously call out their BS and slop. Once the other side is shown to have filed slop once, its credibility is destroyed for the rest of the case. As a bonus, the court might issue, sua sponte, an order to show cause why sanctions ought not be imposed anyway.
But say the client is very cost-sensitive. There, one can still make a bullet-point list of all the cases cited, placing them under the heading "Cases that Do Not Exist" or similar.
The court should get the idea.
Obligatory disclaimer: this shouldn't be construed as legal advice; it's just part of my thought process regarding the OP's hypothetical.
A discussion also being carried out in reddit in places like /r/auslaw