Regulon — NY-A-09097 · NY A 9097 (AI Disclosure in Legal Filings)

Summary

Requires attorneys and pro se litigants in New York civil and criminal proceedings to disclose whether generative AI was used in drafting any paper or filing submitted to the court. Every filing must include a separate affidavit either disclosing AI use and certifying human review of accuracy (including case citations) or affirming that no AI was used. Before using generative AI to draft any filing, attorneys must obtain informed consent from their client (civil) or the defendant (criminal) after warning of the dangers of AI in legal work. Courts are directed to inform all counsel and pro se parties of the dangers of generative AI in legal practice and the requirements of the rule. The bill contains no enforcement mechanism, penalties, or private right of action.

Enforcement & Penalties

Enforcement Authority

No specific enforcement authority or penalty provisions are designated. Obligations are imposed on courts (to inform counsel and litigants), attorneys, and pro se litigants as procedural requirements under the Civil Practice Law and Rules and the Criminal Procedure Law. Enforcement would presumably occur through the court's inherent authority to sanction non-compliance with procedural rules, including contempt, striking of filings, or disciplinary referral. No private right of action is created.

Penalties

The bill specifies no monetary penalties, damages, or remedies. Consequences for non-compliance are not enumerated and would depend on the court's exercise of its inherent procedural and disciplinary authority.

Who Is Covered

Compliance Obligations 7 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page

T-01 AI Identity Disclosure · T-01.1 · Professional · General Consumer App

CPLR Rule 2107(d)-(e)

Plain Language

Every civil filing submitted to a New York court must include a separate affidavit addressing generative AI use. If AI was used in any aspect of drafting — including research, document review, or document creation — the affidavit must disclose that use and certify that a human reviewed the source material and verified accuracy, including case citations. If AI was not used, the affidavit must affirmatively state that. This is a universal filing requirement: every paper or file requires one affidavit or the other. The definition of 'drafting' is broad enough to encompass using AI for legal research even if a human wrote the final text.

Statutory Text

(d) Any paper or file drafted with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence must attach to the filing a separate affidavit disclosing such use and certifying that a human being has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate including, but not limited to, any case citations. (e) Any paper or file drafted without the assistance of generative artificial intelligence must attach to the filing a separate affidavit stating such.

T-01 AI Identity Disclosure · T-01.1 · Professional · General Consumer App

CPL § 10.50(4)-(5)

Plain Language

Every criminal filing submitted to a New York court must include a separate affidavit addressing generative AI use. If AI was used in drafting — including research, document review, or document creation — the affidavit must disclose that use and certify that a human reviewed the source material and verified accuracy, including case citations. If AI was not used, the affidavit must affirmatively state that. This parallels the civil filing requirement in CPLR Rule 2107(d)-(e) but applies in criminal proceedings.

Statutory Text

4. Any paper or file drafted with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence must attach to the filing a separate affidavit disclosing such use and certifying that a human being has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate including, but not limited to, any case citations. 5. Any paper or file drafted without the assistance of generative artificial intelligence must attach to the filing a separate affidavit stating such.

HC-02 AI in Licensed Professional Practice Restrictions · HC-02.1 · Professional · General Consumer App

CPLR Rule 2107(c)

Plain Language

Before using generative AI to draft any paper or filing in a civil matter, the attorney must obtain informed consent from the client. The attorney must first warn the client about the dangers of using generative AI for legal research, document review, and document creation. This is a precondition to any AI-assisted drafting — if consent is not obtained, AI may not be used at all. The provision does not specify the form of consent (written vs. oral) or define what constitutes adequate warning.

Statutory Text

(c) No paper or file shall be drafted with the use of generative artificial intelligence without the informed consent of the client after being warned of the dangers of using generative artificial intelligence in performing legal research, document review, and document creation.

HC-02 AI in Licensed Professional Practice Restrictions · HC-02.1 · Professional · General Consumer App

CPL § 10.50(3)

Plain Language

Before using generative AI to draft any paper or filing in a criminal matter, counsel must obtain informed consent from the defendant. The defendant must first be warned about the dangers of using generative AI for legal research, document review, and document creation. This mirrors the civil requirement but substitutes 'defendant' for 'client,' reflecting the criminal procedure context. No AI-assisted drafting is permitted without this consent.

Statutory Text

3. No paper or file shall be drafted with the use of generative artificial intelligence without the informed consent of the defendant after being warned of the dangers of using generative artificial intelligence in performing legal research, document review, and document creation.

Other · Government · General Consumer App

CPLR Rule 2107(b)

Plain Language

Courts are required to affirmatively inform all attorneys and self-represented litigants about the dangers of using generative AI in legal work and the requirements of this rule. This is an obligation on the court — not on attorneys or AI system operators — and functions as a judicial administrative requirement to ensure parties are aware of the disclosure and consent obligations before they arise.

Statutory Text

(b) Each court shall inform all counsel and pro se litigants that of the dangers of using generative artificial intelligence in performing legal research, document review, and document creation and inform such persons of the requirements of this rule.

Other · Government · General Consumer App

CPL § 10.50(2)

Plain Language

Criminal courts must affirmatively inform all attorneys and pro se defendants about the dangers of using generative AI in legal work and the requirements of this section. This mirrors the civil court notification obligation and is directed at the court itself, not at attorneys or AI operators.

Statutory Text

2. Each court shall inform all counsel and pro se defendants that of the dangers of using generative artificial intelligence in performing legal research, document review, and document creation and inform such persons of the requirements of this section.

T-01 AI Identity Disclosure · T-01.1 · Professional · General Consumer App

CPLR Rule 5528(a)(6)

Plain Language

Appellate briefs filed under CPLR Rule 5528 must include, as a required component of the brief itself, a disclosure of any generative AI use in drafting and a certification that the content was reviewed and verified by a human. This extends the Rule 2107 filing-affidavit requirement specifically to appellate briefs by making it a formal element of the brief structure alongside the appendix and argument sections.

Statutory Text

6. if required by rule twenty-one hundred seven, a disclosure of the use of generative artificial intelligence in the drafting of the brief and certification that the content therein was reviewed and verified by a human being.