6 August 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceSuperior Court of California, County of Orange, Appellate Division6th day of August, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
Jurisdiction
California: AI rules for lawyers
California, United States · Switch state
- United States federal courts
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- District of Columbia
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
What this means for lawyers
The State Bar's 2026 Practical Guidance (approved 14 May 2026, replacing the 2023 version) applies the existing Rules of Professional Conduct to generative and agentic AI. It is guidance, not a rule: lawyers must understand the tool, verify and correct outputs, keep professional judgment, and not delegate candor to the court to AI.
Do not put client confidential information into a generative AI tool that presents material confidentiality or security risks unless the client gives informed consent. Reasonable efforts mean more than relying on marketing assurances, and may include reading terms of use, privacy policies and vendor documentation.
Filing with the court: the Court of Appeal sanctioned counsel $10,000 for briefs with AI-fabricated quotations and citations, and directed the clerk to serve the opinion on the State Bar (Noland, filed 12 Sep 2025, certified for publication).
The State Bar has proposed, but not adopted, comment amendments to Rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 3.3, 5.1 and 5.3 on AI. Its 2026 comment list shows a first round closing 4 May 2026 and a second entry closing 6 Aug 2026. No Supreme Court approval was found.
As at .
Telling the court and the client
- Tell the courtUnclear
Client disclosure/consent: depends. The Guidance says a lawyer must consider disclosing to the client the intention to use AI, how it will be used and the benefits and risks. Informed consent is needed before inputting confidential information into a tool presenting material confidentiality or security risks. Proposed Rule 1.4 Comment [5] (not adopted) would address this.
- Tell the clientVaries
Same basis and sources as above.
What changed in California in the last 12 months
- StartsCalifornia Business and Professions Code section 6068.1 – Attorneys' use of generative artificial intelligence (SB 574, Stats. 2026, ch. 858)
- StartsCalifornia Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7(b)(2) – Personal verification of citations in court filings (SB 574, Stats. 2026, ch. 858)
- DatedAppellate Division Administrative Order No. 26/01: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
- DatedPractical Guidance for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law (2026 version)
AI instruments
Courts and tribunals
12 September 2025; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceCourt of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division ThreeFiled 9/12/25Last checked 31 October 2026
1 September 2025; start date not confirmedBinding ruleJudicial Council of CaliforniaPage headed California Rules of Court 2026; adopted effective September 1, 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
1 September 2025; start date not confirmedPractice noteJudicial Council of CaliforniaPage headed California Rules of Court 2026; adopted effective September 1, 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
Practice noteSuperior Court of California, County of San MateoDate not statedLast checked 31 October 2026
State bar and regulators
14 May 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceState Bar of California (Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct)14 May 2026 (State Bar resource page); the document itself says this 2026 Practical Guidance replaces the 2023 versionLast checked 31 October 2026
22 March 2021; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceState Bar of CaliforniaRule 1.1 Comment [1] 'operative March 22, 2021'; page footer copyright 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
Consultation, not in forceSecondaryState Bar of California (Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct)Date not statedLast checked 31 October 2026
Legislation
Starts 1 January 2027 (not yet in force)Binding ruleCalifornia LegislatureLast checked 11 October 2026
Starts 1 January 2027 (not yet in force)Binding ruleCalifornia LegislatureLast checked 11 October 2026
Sources
12 sources, each with its issuer and the date it was last checked.Show all sources
- Superior Court of California, County of Orange, Appellate Division: Appellate Division Administrative Order No. 26/01: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Three: Noland v. Land of the Free, L.P., B331918 (published opinion on AI-fabricated citations) · last checked
- Judicial Council of California: California Rules of Court, rule 10.430: Generative artificial intelligence use policies · last checked
- Judicial Council of California: California Standards of Judicial Administration, standard 10.80: Use of generative artificial intelligence by judicial officers · last checked
- Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo: Court Policy on the Use of Generative AI for Court Filings and Documents · last checked
- State Bar of California (Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct): Practical Guidance for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law (2026 version) · last checked
- State Bar of California: Ethics & Technology Resources: technology competence (Rule 1.1 Comment [1]) and technology MCLE · last checked
- State Bar of California (Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct): Proposed Amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct Related to Artificial Intelligence (rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 3.3, 5.1, 5.3) · last checked
- California Legislature: California Business and Professions Code section 6068.1 – Attorneys' use of generative artificial intelligence (SB 574, Stats. 2026, ch. 858) · last checked
- California State Senate · last checked
- Office of the Governor of California · last checked
- State Bar of California · last checked
Court AI rule changes + new tools, monthly
One email a month when a court changes its AI practice note or a tool is added to the catalogue. Your address is kept for that note. See Privacy.
Before the work starts
- Define the matter
Confirm the client’s instructions, jurisdiction, intended output and the information available before dividing the work.
- Confirm the source material
Check the work against the original records and identify omissions, contradictions and remaining information.
- Record review and approval
Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.
- Jurisdiction
Apply this guidance to the actual matter and jurisdiction. Confirm current requirements before relying on an example.
Limits on AI assistance
- Confirm firm, client and applicable court or professional restrictions before using any AI feature.