1 September 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceUnited States District Court for the Eastern District of VirginiaEntered this 1st day of September, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
Jurisdiction
Virginia: AI rules for lawyers
Virginia, 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
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
What this means for lawyers
Check the trial court before you file. There is no statewide rule that every Virginia filing must certify generative-AI use. Richmond (entered 13 January 2026) requires a certification disclosing the use of AI in pleadings, exhibits, memoranda, sketch orders, and other filings.
Legal Ethics Opinion 1901, approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia on 24 November 2025 and effective that day, says it is not per se unreasonable to charge the same non-hourly fee when AI is used. Every Rule 1.5(a) factor still applies, and Rule 1.5(b) requires the basis of the fee to be explained, especially when time on the matter is much reduced.
There is no per se duty to tell the client that generative AI was used. The Bar's guidance says disclosure depends on any client agreement or instruction, whether confidential information will be entered, and the risk to the client. Read the tool's terms before entering confidential information, and consider a supervision policy under Rule 5.1.
On 11 March 2026 the Fourth Circuit publicly admonished a member of its bar for nonexistent citations and said the sanction did not turn on whether generative AI was used.
As at .
Telling the court and the client
- Tell the courtVaries by court
Court disclosure: depends. There is no statewide filing-certification rule. Richmond requires disclosure of AI use in a filing and in proposed exhibits.
Staunton, Waynesboro, Amherst, Williamsburg and James City County, and King William require a certification when generative AI drafts, creates, enhances, or modifies a filing or a proposed exhibit. The Eastern District of Virginia order for Chief Judge Lauck's civil cases requires identification of generative-AI use and a citation check. Client disclosure/consent: depends.
The Virginia State Bar says there is no per se requirement to inform the client. Whether disclosure is necessary depends on any agreement or instruction, whether confidential information will be disclosed to the tool, and the risk to the client. The fee basis must still be explained under Rule 1.5(b) and Legal Ethics Opinion 1901.
- Tell the clientVaries
Same basis and sources as above.
What changed in Virginia in the last 12 months
- DatedStanding order on Local Civil Rule 7(E) and artificial intelligence
- DatedLPC Commercial Services, LLC v. Ar-Razzaaq Properties, LLC, Record No. 1407-25-4
- DatedLocal Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence
- DatedLocal Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence
- DatedLocal Rule on Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
5 more changesShow all changes
- DatedLocal Rule on Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
- DatedUnpublished public admonishment for nonexistent citations, No. 25-9517
- DatedLocal Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence
- DatedLocal Rule on Artificial Intelligence
- DatedLegal Ethics Opinion 1901: Reasonable fees and the use of generative artificial intelligence
AI instruments
Courts and tribunals
25 August 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceCourt of Appeals of VirginiaOpinion Issued August 25, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
2 July 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court for the City of Williamsburg and the County of James CityEntered this 2nd day of July, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
25 June 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court for the County of King WilliamENTER: 6/25/26Last checked 31 October 2026
25 June 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court of the City of StauntonDATE: 6/25/2026Last checked 31 October 2026
25 June 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court of the City of WaynesboroDATE: 6/25/2026Last checked 31 October 2026
11 March 2026; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDecided: March 11, 2026Last checked 31 October 2026
3 March 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court for the County of AmherstENTER: 03/03/2026Last checked 31 October 2026
3 more in Courts and tribunalsShow all
Show 3 more instrumentsExpand for more
13 January 2026; start date not confirmedBinding ruleCircuit Court of the City of RichmondENTER: 1/13/2026Last checked 31 October 2026
6 June 2024; start date not confirmedPractice noteSupreme Court of VirginiaEffective Date: June 6, 2024; Last Amended: May 7, 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
1 March 2016; start date not confirmedBinding ruleSupreme Court of Virginiaamendments effective March 1, 2016Last checked 31 October 2026
State bar and regulators
4 more in State bar and regulatorsShow all
24 November 2025; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceVirginia State Bar24 November 2025Last checked 31 October 2026
Professional guidanceVirginia State BarDate not statedLast checked 31 October 2026
Version 1.0, May 2024; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceVirginia Bar AssociationVersion 1.0, May 2024Last checked 31 October 2026
Consultation, not in forceSecondaryVirginia State BarMay 27, 2026 on the comment notice; draft PDF undatedLast checked 31 October 2026
Legislation
1 more in LegislationShow all
1 July 2025; start date not confirmedBinding ruleVirginia General Assembly2025, c. 637Last checked 31 October 2026
Sources
19 sources, each with its issuer and the date it was last checked.Show all sources
- United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia: Standing order on Local Civil Rule 7(E) and artificial intelligence · last checked
- Court of Appeals of Virginia: LPC Commercial Services, LLC v. Ar-Razzaaq Properties, LLC, Record No. 1407-25-4 · last checked
- Circuit Court for the City of Williamsburg and the County of James City: Local Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Circuit Court for the County of King William: Local Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Circuit Court of the City of Staunton: Local Rule on Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Circuit Court of the City of Waynesboro: Local Rule on Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Unpublished public admonishment for nonexistent citations, No. 25-9517 · last checked
- Circuit Court for the County of Amherst: Local Rule on Use of Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Circuit Court of the City of Richmond: Local Rule on Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- Supreme Court of Virginia: Rules for Generative AI Use · last checked
- Supreme Court of Virginia: Rule 1.1 Comment [6]: competence and relevant technology · last checked
- Virginia State Bar: Legal Ethics Opinion 1901: Reasonable fees and the use of generative artificial intelligence · last checked
- Virginia State Bar: Guidance on generative artificial intelligence · last checked
- Virginia Bar Association: Model Artificial Intelligence Policy for Law Firms, Version 1.0 · last checked
- Virginia State Bar: Proposed Legal Ethics Opinion 1902: duties when opposing counsel fails to review generative AI outputs · last checked
- Virginia General Assembly: Code § 19.2-11.14: Use of an artificial intelligence-based tool · last checked
- Supreme Court of Virginia · last checked
- United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia · last checked
- Virginia State Bar · 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.