Overview
- California’s bar ethics committee proposed AI-specific changes to six Rules of Professional Conduct that would require lawyers to independently verify any technology-generated output used for a client.
- The package also adds guidance on client communication, confidentiality, candor to courts, and supervision, and the public comment period has closed.
- Connecticut’s Superior Court Rules Committee proposed a court rule that applies to lawyers and self-represented filers, requiring them to verify citations, legal authorities, or evidence produced by generative AI.
- An analysis of 1,387 tracked AI-related mistakes found 825 were attributed to pro se filers and 522 to lawyers, indicating lawyer-only rules would leave most incidents unaddressed.
- Experts say many failures come from skipped checks under deadline pressure, and they urge built-in workflow guardrails and a written verification step before courts accept filings.