--- title: "Kentucky: AI rules for lawyers" url: "https://ailawframework.com/jurisdictions/kentucky" type: "jurisdiction" site: "AI Law Framework" id: "US-KY" kind: "state" country: "US" parent: "United States" last_checked: "2026-10-31" as_of: "2026-10-31" last_reviewed: "2026-11-03" --- # Kentucky: AI rules for lawyers > Kentucky: court and regulator AI instruments and the tasks that change here. Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/jurisdictions/kentucky Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt ## What this means for lawyers The Kentucky Bar Association's Ethics Committee says the existing Rules of Professional Conduct (SCR 3.130) already apply to AI. Lawyers must keep abreast of AI's benefits and risks (Rule 1.1, Comment 6), and the opinion says not using an available AI tool may in time be a competence failure. Lawyers must safeguard confidential client information when using AI, and should review a provider's privacy policy and disclaimers before use. Lawyers must review court rules on AI and check the accuracy of every AI-assisted filing; partners and supervisors must have AI policies and training in place. No statewide Kentucky court rule, standing order or disclosure requirement on AI was found. Check the local rules and the orders of the particular judge or court before filing. As at 31 October 2026. ## Telling the court and the client **Tell the court:** Varies by court Court disclosure: depends — no statewide rule was found, and the 56th Circuit local rule requires verification, not disclosure; other courts' rules may differ. Client disclosure/consent: depends — KBA E-457 says there is no duty to disclose routine use of AI-generated research, unless the work is outsourced to a third party, the client is being charged for the cost of AI, or court rules require disclosure; consent is needed if an outside AI service will receive confidential information. - [Order approving amendments to Local Rules of Practice, 56th Judicial Circuit (Rule 12: Artificial Intelligence)](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Rules%20of%20Practice/C56D56LOCALRULES.pdf) - [Ethics Opinion KBA E-457](https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA%20E-457.pdf) **Tell the client:** Varies Same basis and sources as above. ## Last checked Last checked 31 October 2026. ## What changed in Kentucky in the last 12 months - 1 January 2026 · Dated: [56th Judicial Circuit Local Rule 12: Artificial Intelligence - Use of AI to Create Court Submissions](#ai-rule-jr-us-ky-56th-circuit-local-rule-12-ai) ## AI instruments ### Courts and tribunals #### 56th Judicial Circuit Local Rule 12: Artificial Intelligence - Use of AI to Create Court Submissions - Type: Court rule or order · Court rule - Issuer: Supreme Court of Kentucky (approving 56th Judicial Circuit local rules: Caldwell, Livingston, Lyon and Trigg) - Date on page: 2 December 2025 - Effective date: 1 January 2026 - Status: 1 January 2026; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Rules%20of%20Practice/C56D56LOCALRULES.pdf Local rule for the 56th Judicial Circuit and District. It cautions lawyers and pro se litigants that generative AI tools such as ChatGPT may produce factually or legally inaccurate content. The court does not prohibit AI, but filers must review and verify AI-generated content to comply with Rule 11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and other legal and ethical standards. Key points: - AI use in preparing filings is not prohibited. - Lawyers and pro se litigants must review and verify computer-generated content for accuracy. - The rule links the duty to Civil Rule 11; it contains no disclosure or certification requirement. (A second copy of the same text in the family-law section of the document refers to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure.) - Applies only in the Caldwell, Livingston, Lyon and Trigg courts. ### State bar and regulators #### Ethics Opinion KBA E-457: The Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law - Type: Ethics opinion - Issuer: Kentucky Bar Association Ethics Committee - Date on page: 15 March 2024 - Effective date: 15 March 2024 - Status: 15 March 2024; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA%20E-457.pdf Interim guidance for Kentucky lawyers on AI under SCR 3.130, issued while a KBA Task Force on Artificial Intelligence continues its work. It says lawyers must keep abreast of AI, safeguard client confidential information, review court rules on AI and check the accuracy of AI-assisted filings, and ensure firm AI policies and training. It also addresses client disclosure and fees. Key points: - No duty to disclose rote use of AI-generated research to the client unless the work is outsourced to a third party, the client is charged for AI costs, or court rules require disclosure. - Lawyers must consider reducing fees where AI reduces the time spent; AI expenses may be charged only with advance client agreement confirmed in writing, and AI training and overhead costs should not be charged. - Continuing duty to safeguard confidential client information when using AI; review the provider's privacy policy and disclaimers first. - Duty to review court rules on AI and confirm the accuracy of all filings that used generative AI. - Partners and supervisors must ensure AI policies and training are in place. - The opinion is advisory only (formally adopted by the KBA Board of Governors under SCR 3.530). ## Sources - Supreme Court of Kentucky (approving 56th Judicial Circuit local rules: Caldwell, Livingston, Lyon and Trigg): [56th Judicial Circuit Local Rule 12: Artificial Intelligence - Use of AI to Create Court Submissions](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Rules%20of%20Practice/C56D56LOCALRULES.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Kentucky Bar Association Ethics Committee: [Ethics Opinion KBA E-457: The Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law](https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA%20E-457.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - [Kentucky Court of Justice](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Supreme-Court/Pages/Administrative-Orders.aspx) · last checked 31 October 2026 ## Key facts - Kind: State - Task versions written for this jurisdiction: 0 - AI instruments recorded: 2 *Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*