1 January 2027; start date not confirmedBinding ruleSupreme Court of New Jersey; Board on Continuing Legal EducationLast checked 31 October 2026
Jurisdiction
New Jersey: AI rules for lawyers
New Jersey, United States · Switch state
- United States federal courts
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- 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 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
Check and verify everything AI generates. The guidelines treat failure to do so as a possible breach of the RPCs (3.1, 4.1(a)(1), 8.4(c)).
Tell a client about your AI use if they ask, or if they could not make an informed decision without knowing. There is no duty to tell them every time.
Make sure an AI system is secure before entering non-public client information (RPC 1.6(f)), and supervise other lawyers' and staff's AI use (RPCs 5.1–5.3).
The Court encourages (does not require) a written firm AI policy; it says a policy is not a "safe harbor". Its sample template covers citation verification and built-in AI features in everyday software.
As at .
Telling the court and the client
- Tell the courtUnclear
Court disclosure: no rule found. The interim guidelines say the RPCs do not require disclosure of AI use. No court rule or standing order requiring disclosure was found in the sources read. Client disclosure/consent: depends. No duty to tell clients every time, but a duty to do so if the client asks or cannot make an informed decision without knowing.
- Tell the clientVaries
Same basis and sources as above.
What changed in New Jersey in the last 12 months
AI instruments
Courts and tribunals
2026-03-30; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceSupreme Court of New Jersey (notice signed by Hon. Michael J. Blee, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Courts)Last checked 31 October 2026
2025-04-02; start date not confirmedPractice noteSupreme Court of New Jersey (notice signed by Hon. Michael J. Blee, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Courts)Last checked 31 October 2026
Government and other bodies
Issued 25 January 2024; start date not confirmedPractice noteSupreme Court of New Jersey Committee on AILast checked 10 October 2026
Sources
- Supreme Court of New Jersey; Board on Continuing Legal Education: Order amending Court Rule 1:42-1 and CLE Regulations 103:1 and 201:1: one credit in technology-related subjects (includes AI) · last checked
- Supreme Court of New Jersey (notice signed by Hon. Michael J. Blee, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Courts): Notice to the Bar: Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Related Technologies – Benefits of AI Policies (with sample starter template) · last checked
- Supreme Court of New Jersey (notice signed by Hon. Michael J. Blee, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Courts): Notice to the Bar: Attorney Responsibilities as to Cybersecurity & Emerging Technologies – New Requirement of One CLE Credit in Technology-Related Subjects; RPC 1.1 comment declined · last checked
- Supreme Court of New Jersey Committee on AI: Preliminary Guidelines on the use of AI by New Jersey lawyers · last checked
- Notice to the Bar: Legal Practice – Preliminary Guidelines on the Use of AI by New Jersey Lawyers · 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.