Maine: AI rules for lawyers

What this means for lawyers

No Maine-specific court rule, standing order or bar ethics opinion on lawyers' use of AI was found on the official sites searched. The general duties (competence, candor, supervision, confidentiality, and Rule 11 or its state equivalent) still apply to AI-assisted work.

In the District of Maine, the court treated unverified generative-AI citations as a Rule 11 failure. It said a lawyer who uses such tools "must ensure that every citation and quoted passage has been independently confirmed using reliable legal sources", and that AI use does not reduce the duties of diligence, candor and reasonable inquiry.

The same order treated late disclosure of AI use as a candor concern, because counsel first disclosed it only after a show cause order. The order does not create a general disclosure rule.

Sanctions in that case were non-monetary: an admonition, a CLE course on generative AI, written firm procedures, a compliance certification within 45 days, and the tainted response struck, with an order to file an amended response.

As at 31 October 2026.

Telling the court and the client

• Tell the courtUnclear

  Court disclosure: no rule found. No Maine state-court or District of Maine AI disclosure or certification requirement was found, although the D. Me. order treated non-disclosure as relevant to candor in one case. Client disclosure/consent: no rule found; no Maine bar opinion addresses it.

  Order Imposing Sanctions, Fuller v. Hyde School, 2:25-cv-00354-SDN
• Tell the clientUnclear

  Same basis and sources as above.