AI Rules for New York Law Firms
Last verified July 8, 2026
New York's court system adopted a statewide rule governing AI use in litigation, effective June 2026, making this the first binding requirement your firm faces rather than optional guidance. Clients, carriers, and judges are all watching how firms handle AI-assisted drafting, and two bar associations have already issued opinions on where the ethical lines sit. A bill in the Assembly would add a formal disclosure requirement on top of what's already in effect.
Where New York Stands
New York moved from guidance to binding rule with Part 161 of the Rules of the Chief Administrative Judge, adopted March 25, 2026 and effective June 1, 2026. It does not require your firm to disclose AI use in court papers, but it does require personal attorney review of every submission and independent verification that nothing was fabricated. You still need to check each judge's individual part rules, since some may impose stricter requirements than Part 161 itself.
What Your Firm Must Do
Two bar opinions fill in the ethical detail behind Part 161. The NYSBA Task Force on Artificial Intelligence's report, adopted by the House of Delegates in April 2024, sets the statewide ethics baseline: understand each tool's risks and benefits, safeguard confidential client data, verify all output, and never substitute AI for independent professional judgment. Notably, it does not require client consent for AI use, unlike guidance in some other states. The New York City Bar Association's Formal Opinion 2024-5 adds more specific guardrails, including that your firm should not bill clients for time saved by AI and should be candid with courts about AI-related errors when they occur.
What the Courts Are Doing
The Unified Court System's Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence, in effect since October 10, 2025, governs judges and court staff directly rather than attorneys. It limits them to approved AI tools, requires mandatory human review, and bars confidential data from public AI platforms. It doesn't bind your firm, but it signals how chambers are likely to handle AI-assisted filings and what courts expect from everyone appearing before them.
What's Still Pending
A8546, introduced for the 2025-2026 session, would go further than Part 161 by requiring a separate affidavit for any civil filing drafted with generative AI assistance, certifying human verification of accuracy. It's currently sitting in Assembly Judiciary after being referred on January 7, 2026. If enacted, it would create a stricter disclosure regime than the one your firm operates under today, so litigation practices should track its progress.
Prefer to talk it through?
Get a free consultation from an AI chief of staff.
A 30-minute call. Get a clear read on what New York's rules mean for your firm and what to do first.
Book a Free ConsultationThis page covers New York law. The free assessment scores your specific firm across five domains in one minute.