1 September 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleChancery and Circuit Courts of the Eleventh Judicial District (Hamilton County)Adopted as Amended, Effective September 1, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
Jurisdiction
Tennessee: AI rules for lawyers
Tennessee, 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 Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
What this means for lawyers
In Hamilton County chancery and circuit courts, from 1 September 2026, anyone who presents a document or exhibit, including material generated with AI, does so subject to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 11 and Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 57. The filer, lawyer and law firm remain responsible for AI-generated material, accurate or inaccurate. The rule does not set a disclosure legend.
In the 20th Judicial District (Davidson County), from 1 June 2026, a lawyer or self-represented party must not file a pleading, motion, brief or other paper prepared with generative AI without first confirming its accuracy, including quotations, citations, paraphrased assertions and legal analysis. The signer remains responsible. A breach may be sanctioned.
On the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, from 17 August 2026, a filing that includes any content written by an AI tool must show this statement in bold on page 1: “This document includes content written by an artificial intelligence tool.” Filings must also comply with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 11.
As at .
Telling the court and the client
- Tell the courtVaries by court
On the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, from 17 August 2026, a filing that includes any content written by an AI tool must show this statement in bold on page 1: “This document includes content written by an artificial intelligence tool.” Filings must also comply with Tenn. R. Civ.
P. 11. The Board may strike a non-compliant filing, issue a show-cause order, or impose other Rule 11.03 sanctions. The Board’s Fall 2024 newsletter article on AI hallucinations, read in full, does not discuss client disclosure.
- Tell the clientUnclear
Same basis and sources as above.
What changed in Tennessee in the last 12 months
- DatedLocal Rules of Civil Practice, Rule 6.01: Rule 11, Supreme Court Rule 57, and artificial intelligence
- DatedStanding Order in re: Use of Artificial Intelligence
- DatedLocal Rules § 6.03: signatures, certifying court filings, and generative AI
- DatedPublic Chapter No. 781: definition of person excludes artificial intelligence
- DatedPublic censure, BPR #024803, 30 March 2026: unchecked AI citations and supervision of a paralegal
AI instruments
Courts and tribunals
17 August 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board, Tennessee Bureau of Workers' CompensationENTERED this 3rd day of August, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
1 June 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit, Chancery, Criminal and Probate Courts of the Twentieth Judicial District (Davidson County)Effective: June 1, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
1 January 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court, Division III, Twentieth Judicial District (Davidson County)These rules shall be effective on January 1, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
State bar and regulators
30 March 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceBoard of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of TennesseeMarch 30, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
16 December 2025; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceBoard of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of TennesseeDecember 16, 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
15 December 2025; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceBoard of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of TennesseeDecember 16, 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
Fall 2024; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceBoard of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of TennesseeFall 2024Last checked 31 October 2026
Legislation
28 April 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleTennessee General AssemblyBill history: 04/28/2026 Signed by Governor; Pub. Ch. 781Last checked 31 October 2026
Sources
11 sources, each with its issuer and the date it was last checked.Show all sources
- Chancery and Circuit Courts of the Eleventh Judicial District (Hamilton County): Local Rules of Civil Practice, Rule 6.01: Rule 11, Supreme Court Rule 57, and artificial intelligence · last checked
- Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Tennessee Bureau of Workers' Compensation: Standing Order in re: Use of Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Circuit, Chancery, Criminal and Probate Courts of the Twentieth Judicial District (Davidson County): Local Rules § 6.03: signatures, certifying court filings, and generative AI · last checked
- Circuit Court, Division III, Twentieth Judicial District (Davidson County): Chamber Rules, Section XXIII: use of generative artificial intelligence · last checked
- Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee: Public censure, BPR #024803, 30 March 2026: unchecked AI citations and supervision of a paralegal · last checked
- Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee: Public censure, BPR #035492, 16 December 2025: failure to check another lawyer's AI citations · last checked
- Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee: Public censure, BPR #035871, 15 December 2025: unchecked AI citations · last checked
- Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee: Board Notes, Fall 2024: The Danger of Generative Artificial Intelligence Hallucinations in Legal Practice · last checked
- Tennessee General Assembly: Public Chapter No. 781: definition of person excludes artificial intelligence · last checked
- Tennessee General Assembly · last checked
- Tennessee General Assembly · 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.