Florida 24-1 requires informed consent before any third-party AI disclosure of confidential information.

The Florida Bar Board of Governors approved Ethics Opinion 24-1 on January 19, 2024, making Florida the first U.S. jurisdiction to issue formal ethics guidance on lawyers' use of generative AI. Two operational additions to the ABA Opinion 512 baseline matter for Florida-domiciled firms and any matter involving Florida-licensed attorneys.

First, the third-party AI informed-consent rule. Opinion 24-1 states: "It is recommended that a lawyer obtain the affected client's informed consent prior to utilizing a third-party generative AI program if the utilization would involve the disclosure of any confidential information." [S05] The rule operates as a higher floor than ABA Op. 512's informed-consent standard for self-learning tools — Florida applies the rule to any third-party AI program where confidential information is disclosed, regardless of whether the tool is self-learning. The Florida-grade clause is the operational default for any multi-state firm.

Second, the in-writing-preferred AI cost disclosure. Opinion 24-1 holds: "Lawyers should inform a client, preferably in writing, of the lawyer's intent to charge the client the actual cost of using generative AI." [S06] The rule maps to Rule 4-1.5 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar and operationalizes ABA Op. 512's overhead-or-charge framework. Combined with the ABA Op. 512 default (overhead unless agreed otherwise), the Florida posture is: any pass-through requires written disclosure at engagement open and itemization on the invoice.

A third operational addition — the lawyer-advertising compliance rule for AI chatbots: "A lawyer should be careful when using generative AI chatbots for advertising and intake purposes and must inform prospective clients they are communicating with an AI program." [S14] Florida firms with intake automation must disclose that the prospect is interacting with an AI.