--- title: "Wisconsin: AI rules for lawyers" url: "https://ailawframework.com/jurisdictions/wisconsin" type: "jurisdiction" site: "AI Law Framework" id: "US-WI" kind: "state" country: "US" parent: "United States" last_checked: "2026-10-31" as_of: "2026-10-31" last_reviewed: "2026-11-03" --- # Wisconsin: AI rules for lawyers > Wisconsin: court and regulator AI instruments and the tasks that change here. Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/jurisdictions/wisconsin Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt ## What this means for lawyers There is no statewide Wisconsin Supreme Court rule or State Bar formal ethics opinion on generative AI. A rule petition (26-02) was dismissed on 15 October 2026 after the petitioner withdrew it. AI rules are local and vary, so check the specific county and judicial district before filing. Kenosha County (CR 02-12) and Waukesha County Family Division (26-SO-03 (67)) require written AI disclosure with a certification. Portage County Rule 2.15 and the Fifth Judicial District Interim Policy (23 September 2026) take the opposite approach: no routine disclosure, but the lawyer stays fully responsible, certifies citations under Wis. Stat. 802.05(2), and may be ordered to disclose if the filing is challenged. Verify every citation from AI output regardless of county. The Bar's own materials say hallucinated-citation cases are arguably a failure of the duty of candour to verify what is filed. As at 31 October 2026. ## Telling the court and the client **Tell the court:** Varies by court Court disclosure: depends. There is no statewide rule; Kenosha County and Waukesha County Family Division require it, while Portage County and the Fifth Judicial District say it is not required unless the court asks. Client disclosure/consent: no rule found. No statewide rule requires it; Bar CLE materials list, as common themes of bar opinions, informed client consent before entering confidential information into AI tools and telling clients about GenAI use when necessary or asked. - [Kenosha County Circuit Court Rules, CR 02-12](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Kenosha%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf) - [Standing Order 26-SO-03 (67)](https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/media/ppqccll3/26-so-03-67-family-use-of-ai.pdf) - [Portage County Circuit Court Rules, Rule 2.15](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Portage%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf) - [Fifth Judicial District Generative AI Interim Policy](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Judicial%20District%20Rules/Fifth%20Judicial%20District%20-%20Generative%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20Interim%20Policy.pdf) - [The State of AI in Legal Practice (AMC 2025 Session 4)](https://www.wisbar.org/AMC/2025/Documents/Thursday/2Th_S4_AIEthics.pdf) **Tell the client:** Varies Same basis and sources as above. ## Last checked Last checked 31 October 2026. ## What changed in Wisconsin in the last 12 months - 16 October 2026 · Dated: [Portage County Circuit Court Rules, Rule 2.15 Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence](#ai-rule-jr-us-wi-portage-county-rule-2-15-genai) - 15 October 2026 · Dated: [Order dismissing Rule Petition 26-02 (proposed SCR Ch. 76, Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Court Proceedings)](#ai-rule-jr-us-wi-rule-petition-26-02-dismissed) - 23 September 2026 · Dated: [Fifth Judicial District - Generative Artificial Intelligence Interim Policy](#ai-rule-jr-us-wi-fifth-district-genai-interim-policy) - 22 January 2026 · Dated: [Standing Order 26-SO-03 (67): Use of Artificial Intelligence and Certification of Citations in Briefs, Proposed Orders and Other Filings in Family Division](#ai-rule-jr-us-wi-waukesha-family-ai-standing-order) ## AI instruments ### Courts and tribunals #### Portage County Circuit Court Rules, Rule 2.15 Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence - Type: Court rule or order · Court rule - Issuer: Portage County Circuit Court (Ninth Judicial District), Wisconsin - Date on page: October 16, 2026 - Effective date: 16 October 2026 - Status: 16 October 2026; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Portage%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf Local rule 2.15 says attorneys and parties who use generative AI to prepare anything submitted to the court remain fully responsible for its accuracy and integrity and must comply with Wis. Stat. 802.05(2)(a)-(d). Filers do not have to disclose GenAI use on filing, although the court may require disclosure if accuracy or integrity is challenged. Failure to comply may be grounds for sanctions after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond. Key points: - Expressly no routine disclosure duty; disclosure may be required if a submission is challenged. - Filing legal arguments, briefs, affidavits or pleadings certifies that citations are correct, based on applicable law and not frivolous. - Listed sanctions include rejection of pleadings, monetary sanctions including costs and actual attorney fees, contempt, dismissal and filing limits. - Third-party commentary describing this rule as a disclosure requirement is contradicted by the rule text read here. #### Order dismissing Rule Petition 26-02 (proposed SCR Ch. 76, Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Court Proceedings) - Type: Court rule or order · Administrative order - Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court - Date on page: October 15, 2026 - Effective date: 15 October 2026 - Status: 15 October 2026; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1192324 A private petition filed on 19 February 2026 asked the Court to create a new SCR chapter regulating generative AI use by lawyers, judges, clerks, court staff and self-represented litigants. The petitioner moved to withdraw it on 30 September 2026 and the Court granted the motion and dismissed the petition on 15 October 2026. No statewide AI rule for lawyers exists as a result of this petition. Key points: - Petition 26-02 was filed 19 February 2026 and dismissed 15 October 2026 after the petitioner withdrew it. - The Court did not adopt, or rule on the merits of, any proposed AI rule. - Statewide there is therefore still no AI-specific supreme court rule; the existing SCR ch. 20 duties continue to apply. - The petition text itself was not read for this record; only the order, the archive page and the withdrawal letter were. #### Fifth Judicial District - Generative Artificial Intelligence Interim Policy - Type: Court policy - Issuer: Chief Judge, Fifth Judicial District, Wisconsin Circuit Court - Date on page: 23 September 2026 - Effective date: 23 September 2026 - Status: 23 September 2026; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Judicial%20District%20Rules/Fifth%20Judicial%20District%20-%20Generative%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20Interim%20Policy.pdf Issued by the Chief Judge under SCR 70.19(3)(f) and 70.20(1). Attorneys and parties who use generative AI to prepare anything submitted to the court remain fully responsible for its accuracy and must comply with Wis. Stat. 802.05(2)(a)-(d). They do not have to disclose AI use on filing, but the court may require disclosure if accuracy or integrity is challenged. The policy supersedes any non-conforming local rule in the district and stays in force until the Wisconsin Supreme Court issues a superseding policy or rule. Key points: - No routine disclosure of GenAI use is required; disclosure may be required if a submission's accuracy or integrity is challenged. - Presenting arguments, briefs, affidavits or pleadings certifies that the legal arguments are correctly cited, based on applicable law and not frivolous. - After notice and a chance to respond, sanctions listed include rejection or non-consideration of pleadings, monetary sanctions including costs and actual attorney fees, contempt, dismissal, filing limits and any other sanction the court deems appropriate. - Signed by Chief Judge Julie Genovese. - Supersedes inconsistent local rules in the district; counties may add consistent supplemental rules approved by the Chief Judge. - The counties in the Fifth Judicial District were not confirmed from the page; check the district before relying on it. #### Standing Order 26-SO-03 (67): Use of Artificial Intelligence and Certification of Citations in Briefs, Proposed Orders and Other Filings in Family Division - Type: Court rule or order · Standing order - Issuer: Waukesha County Circuit Court, Third Judicial District (Presiding Judge Ralph M. Ramirez), Wisconsin - Date on page: Dated at Waukesha, Wisconsin the 22nd Day of January, 2026 - Effective date: 22 January 2026 - Status: 22 January 2026; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/media/ppqccll3/26-so-03-67-family-use-of-ai.pdf Applies to all attorneys, parties and pro se litigants filing briefs, proposed orders and other written submissions in the Waukesha County Family Division. Anyone who uses AI in any capacity to create, prepare, draft or review a filing must disclose it in the document using a set certification naming the tool, and certify under penalty of perjury that every citation to law, case, statute or the record was verified and exists as cited. Non-compliance may lead to striking the filing, sanctions or disciplinary referral, and mistake, lack of technical expertise or time pressure are not accepted as good-faith excuses. Key points: - Disclosure is mandatory and must name the AI tool used. - The certification is made under penalty of perjury and covers every citation to law, case, statute or the record. - Consequences include striking the filing, sanctions or disciplinary referral. - Limited to the Family Division in Waukesha County. - The use of AI does not relieve attorneys or pro se litigants of their obligations under the SCR rules of professional conduct or Wis. Stat. 802.05. #### Committee explores role of artificial intelligence in Wisconsin courts (Third Branch eNews, October 2025) - Type: Article - Issuer: Director of State Courts Office, Wisconsin Court System - Date on page: Volume 4, Issue 10 (October 2025) - Effective date: Not stated - Status: Volume 4, Issue 10 (October 2025); start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wicourts.gov/news/thirdbranch/oct25/ai.htm The Director of State Courts Office convened an interdisciplinary AI Committee that began reviewing a proposed interim policy on 23 September (2025) to guide the court system's own use of AI, beginning with the circuit courts. The page says the policy, if adopted, would affirm a commitment to transparency, fairness and public trust. It is aimed at court employees and judicial officers, not directly at lawyers, and no adopted policy was found. Key points: - Describes a proposed interim policy, not an adopted one. - Focus is court staff and judicial officers' use of AI, starting with the circuit courts. - No later adopted statewide court-system AI policy was found in searches. #### Kenosha County Circuit Court Rules, CR 02-12 Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Court Filings - Type: Court rule or order · Court rule - Issuer: Kenosha County Circuit Court, Wisconsin - Date on page: as of January 12, 2026 (revised) - Effective date: Not stated - Status: as of January 12, 2026 (revised); start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Kenosha%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf Any person filing documents with the Kenosha County court must disclose use of AI in writing or preparing a filing, either in the document or in a separate certification filed with it. The disclosure must state that AI was used, name the tool or system, briefly describe how it was used and note any relevant limitations or biases. The filer must certify they reviewed and verified the accuracy and appropriateness of AI-generated content. The rule does not apply to common legal research tools or databases unless they incorporate generative AI. Key points: - Mandatory written disclosure with the filing or in a simultaneous certification. - Four content items: statement of use, tool(s) used, how used, limitations or biases. - Certification that AI-generated content was reviewed and verified. - Research databases are excluded unless they incorporate generative AI capabilities. ### State bar and regulators #### Formal Ethics Opinion EF-15-01: Ethical Obligations of Attorneys Using Cloud Computing (amended 2017) - Type: Ethics opinion - Issuer: State Bar of Wisconsin Professional Ethics Committee - Date on page: Amended September 8, 2017 - Effective date: 8 September 2017 - Status: 8 September 2017; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/EF-15-01%20Cloud%20Computing%20Amended.pdf Not about AI, but it is the State Bar's formal guidance on a lawyer's duties when client information is held by technology vendors, and the Bar's own AI materials rely on it. It ties technology use to SCR 20:1.1 competence, 20:1.4 communication, 20:1.6 confidentiality and 20:5.3 nonlawyer assistants, and says lawyers must use reasonable efforts, which depend on the technology, practice type and client needs. Lawyers using third-party generative AI tools can apply the same reasonableness analysis, but the opinion does not mention generative AI. Key points: - Rules engaged: SCR 20:1.1, 20:1.4, 20:1.6 and 20:5.3. - Lawyers must make reasonable efforts to assess a provider's security; specific requirements are not prescribed because technology changes. - The opinion refers to ABA Comment [8] to SCR 20:1.1 on keeping abreast of technology. - Does not address generative AI; no AI-specific formal opinion was found. #### The State of AI in Legal Practice: An Update on Ethics & Implementation of AI into Legal Technology (Annual Meeting & Conference 2025, Session 4 materials) - Type: Law society or bar guidance · Bar guidance - Issuer: State Bar of Wisconsin (Ethics Counsel and Practice Management Advisor) - Date on page: AMC 2025 - Effective date: Not stated - Status: AMC 2025; start date not confirmed - Last checked 31 October 2026 - URL: https://www.wisbar.org/AMC/2025/Documents/Thursday/2Th_S4_AIEthics.pdf Educational conference materials by the State Bar's Ethics Counsel and Practice Management Advisor. They map generative AI use onto existing Wisconsin rules (SCR 20:1.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 5.1/5.3, 5.5 and the candour provisions), cite ABA Formal Opinion 512, and list as common themes of bar opinions verifying AI output before submitting it to courts, informed consent before inputting confidential client information, and communicating GenAI use to clients when necessary or asked. They tell attorneys to be aware of and comply with local court orders on GenAI. They are not a formal ethics opinion and not binding. Key points: - Says hallucinated-citation cases are arguably a lawyer issue: a failure of the duty of candour to verify what is submitted to the court. - Lists competence, confidentiality, supervision, candour, client communication, fees and unauthorised practice as the relevant rule areas. - Lists, as a common theme across bar opinions, informed consent before inputting confidential client information into GenAI tools (SCR 20:1.6). - Says attorneys must be aware of local court orders on GenAI and be ready to comply with them. ## Sources 11 sources, each with its issuer and the date it was last checked. - Portage County Circuit Court (Ninth Judicial District), Wisconsin: [Portage County Circuit Court Rules, Rule 2.15 Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Portage%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Wisconsin Supreme Court: [Order dismissing Rule Petition 26-02 (proposed SCR Ch. 76, Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Court Proceedings)](https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1192324) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Chief Judge, Fifth Judicial District, Wisconsin Circuit Court: [Fifth Judicial District - Generative Artificial Intelligence Interim Policy](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Judicial%20District%20Rules/Fifth%20Judicial%20District%20-%20Generative%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20Interim%20Policy.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Waukesha County Circuit Court, Third Judicial District (Presiding Judge Ralph M. Ramirez), Wisconsin: [Standing Order 26-SO-03 (67): Use of Artificial Intelligence and Certification of Citations in Briefs, Proposed Orders and Other Filings in Family Division](https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/media/ppqccll3/26-so-03-67-family-use-of-ai.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Director of State Courts Office, Wisconsin Court System: [Committee explores role of artificial intelligence in Wisconsin courts (Third Branch eNews, October 2025)](https://www.wicourts.gov/news/thirdbranch/oct25/ai.htm) · last checked 31 October 2026 - Kenosha County Circuit Court, Wisconsin: [Kenosha County Circuit Court Rules, CR 02-12 Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Court Filings](https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules/Kenosha%20County%20Circuit%20Court%20Rules.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - State Bar of Wisconsin Professional Ethics Committee: [Formal Ethics Opinion EF-15-01: Ethical Obligations of Attorneys Using Cloud Computing (amended 2017)](https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/EF-15-01%20Cloud%20Computing%20Amended.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - State Bar of Wisconsin (Ethics Counsel and Practice Management Advisor): [The State of AI in Legal Practice: An Update on Ethics & Implementation of AI into Legal Technology (Annual Meeting & Conference 2025, Session 4 materials)](https://www.wisbar.org/AMC/2025/Documents/Thursday/2Th_S4_AIEthics.pdf) · last checked 31 October 2026 - [Wisconsin Court System](https://www.wicourts.gov/scrules/archive/2602.htm) · last checked 31 October 2026 - [Waukesha County](https://www.waukeshacounty.gov/news/posts/new-standing-order-on-use-of-artificial-intelligence-in-family-division-filings/) · last checked 31 October 2026 - [Wisconsin Legislature](https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2025/proposals/sb295) · last checked 31 October 2026 ## Key facts - Kind: State - Task versions written for this jurisdiction: 0 - AI instruments recorded: 8 *Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*