The New York State Unified Court System has adopted a new rule, Part 161, regulating the use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) by attorneys in New York State courts. While Part 161, titled “Use of Artificial Intelligence Technology,” does permit attorneys and parties to use AI programs and tools to assist in preparing pleadings and other legal documents that are to be filed with a court in New York State, the rule emphasizes the importance of ethical compliance and professional responsibility in the use of such technology. Part 161 is effective June 1, 2026.
Key Takeaways of Part 161:
Attorneys and parties are permitted to use AI programs and tools in the preparation of pleadings and other legal documents, provided they adhere to their existing duties and responsibilities under the law. Notably, an attorney is not required to disclose to a court that an AI tool was utilized in the preparation of a paper (NY CLS Standards & Admin Pol § 161.3).
Part 161 defines “AI” as any machine-based system capable of making predictions, recommendations, and/or decisions based on human-defined objectives and inputs. The term “paper” encompasses pleadings, motion briefs, memoranda, affidavits, and similar documents prepared for court submission, excluding evidentiary materials. (NY CLS Standards & Admin Pol § 161.2).
The new rule is based upon an attorney’s existing duties and responsibilities under the Rules of Professional Conduct, including the duty to independently review and verify the accuracy of the content of any document submitted to a court. Additionally, attorneys are still bound by the requirements of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1a, which requires any pleading, motion, and/or paper submitted to a court to be signed by an attorney, certifying that to the best of their knowledge, the content of the submission is not frivolous, inaccurate, or otherwise misleading to the court and/or another party.
Appendix A of Part 161 explains that each attorney (or party) who uses an AI tool to prepare any paper submitted to a court to inform themselves about the capabilities and limitations of the AI tool, including the possibility of generating fictitious citations to non-existent cases or otherwise false statements (also commonly referred to as “hallucinations”). Attorneys should be diligent in reviewing any paper that was prepared with the assistance of an AI tool in order to maintain compliance with an attorney’s professional and ethical obligations before submitting a paper to a court. By signing and submitting a paper to a court, the attorney certifies that the submission contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. Failure to meet this requirement may result in the court ordering sanctions or other remedial actions against the offending attorney. 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1a. Courts will not excuse a submission that contains fictitious citations and/or other false information when it is apparent that the submitting attorney failed to review and verify the contents of the submission, including each of the case citations.
But remember: a court is still permitted to adopt its own part rule(s) governing the use of AI tools in preparing papers submitted to the court. So it is best practice to review the part rules of each court that an attorney is practicing in. (NY CLS Standards & Admin Pol § 161.4).
 – Ropers Majeski){kind=link}
){kind=link}