3rd Judicial Circuit Court, Madison County, Illinois Document Filing Requirements

CRITICALCivil cases

Applies to

Routine motion

Must include

proposed order

A proposed order must be submitted with each Routine Motion.

Proposed orders shall be submitted with the Routine Motion.

CRITICALCivil cases

Applies to

Routine motion

A Routine Motion must notify the opposing side that it is routine and that failing to object before the hearing date will result in the motion being granted.

The Routine Motion shall notify the opposing side that the motion is routine and that a failure to file an objection prior to the hearing date will result in the motion being granted.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Submission

Use of ChatGPT or other research tools is permitted, but counsel and self-represented litigants must personally confirm the accuracy of tool-generated content.

The use of ChatGPT or any other research tool is not prohibited, however, counsel and self-represented litigants must personally and respectively confirm the accuracy of any content generated by these tools.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery

If AI or TAR is used for document review or written discovery compliance and production, the responding party must ensure adequate validation and human oversight.

If AI or Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) is used to aid in document review or written discovery compliance and production, the responding party must disclose the method used upon request and ensure adequate validation and human oversight.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Case management order

All Case Management Orders must include the disclosure deadlines for AI-enhanced or AI-generated evidence and expert reports.

The above referenced disclosure deadlines for AI enhanced or generated evidence as well as Expert Report Disclosures shall be included in all Case Management Orders

CRITICAL

The disclosure must verify that the evidence and the algorithm used to create or enhance it have been preserved in original and AI-processed forms.

- 5. Verification that the evidence and the algorithm used to create or enhance the evidence has been preserved in its original and AI-processed forms; and

CRITICAL

Applies to

Submission

Counsel and self-represented litigants are responsible for complete and accurate representations in every submission.

Counsel and self-represented litigants (pro se") are responsible for providing the Court with compete and accurate representations in any submission (including filings, demonstratives, evidence, and oral arguments).

CRITICAL

A copy of the original evidence must accompany any enhanced version.

- 6. Attach a copy of the original version of the evidence in addition to any enhanced version of the evidence.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Attorney certification of discovery responses

Must include

ai disclosure

An attorney must complete and sign the AI certification form when AI was used to prepare, draft, or review discovery compliance, certifying the listed review, accuracy, confidentiality, and professional-judgment matters.

This form is to be completed and signed by any attorney submitting discovery compliance (answers and responses) before this Court whereby artificial intelligence (AI) tools have been used in the preparation, drafting, and/or review of such discovery compliance. I, the undersigned attorney, hereby certify the following regarding the discovery compliance submitted and served in this matter: 1. I have reviewed all discovery compliance submitted to ensure that the discovery compliance is factually accurate, complete, and responsive. 2. To the extent any AI tool (ex. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Co-Counsel, and/or similar software) has been used to assist in drafting or organizing discovery compliance, I have verified that all content has been reviewed and edited by counsel for legal sufficiency, accuracy, and compliance of all applicable rules. 3. I have not relied on AI tools to generate objections or answers/responses without applying professional judgment and tailoring to the specific facts and legal context of the case. 4. No confidential or privileged material has been entered into any AI system that stores or transmits information to external servers, except where such use is permitted by Protective Order or by prior agreement of the parties. 5. The use of AI in preparing discovery compliance has not compromised the integrity of any factual statement, legal objection, or disclosure requirement under Illinois law. I, hereby certify, that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Affidavit

Must include

ai disclosure

The required affidavit must identify the AI-enhanced or AI-generated evidence and portions, describe the technology and its use, certify review for accuracy and compliance, and document or describe the method demonstrating reliability and validity.

At least ninety (90) days prior to trial, any party that seeks to introduce evidence enhanced or generated by an artificial intelligence (AI) program shall give proper and timely notice as well as disclose such evidence to the opposing party via affidavit of the attorney or analyst with the following: - 1. That Exhibit "X" is evidence that was enhanced or generated by technology utilizing AI, specifically describing what portion of the evidence was generated and/or enhanced; - 2. Name, identify, and/or describe the technology that had been used to enhance the evidence, the date it was enhanced and/or generated, how it operates, what steps have been taken to enhance the evidence with such technology, and any algorithm used to enhance or create the evidence; - 3. Certification that the evidence has been reviewed by a competent expert or attorney for accuracy and compliance; - 4. Documentation (or a description of the method used) to demonstrate the AI tool's reliability and validity in producing or enhancing the evidence;

CRITICAL

Applies to

Disclosure

The jury-selection AI disclosure must identify the tool's nature and the public or private data it analyzes.

The disclosure shall identify the nature of the tool, and what public or private data it analyzes.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery

If AI or TAR is used for document review or written discovery compliance and production, the responding party must disclose the method used when requested.

If AI or Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) is used to aid in document review or written discovery compliance and production, the responding party must disclose the method used upon request

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

Counsel remains fully responsible for discovery answers and responses and may not rely on AI-generated boilerplate, general objections, or speculative assertions.

Counsel is fully responsible for all answers and responses submitted to the Court and may not rely on AI-generated boilerplate language, general objections, and/or speculative assertions.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

Must include

ai disclosure

When AI or automated summarization tools assist with specified discovery responses or client-record summaries, counsel must disclose their use to opposing counsel at service and identify the general tool category; disclosure does not waive privilege.

If AI or automated summarization tools were used to assist in answering Interrogatories, responding to Request for Production, and/or summarizing client records, counsel must disclose the same to opposing counsel at the time of service. The disclosure shall not waive privilege, but it must identify the general category of tool used (e.g., "AI-powered medical summarization tool").

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response certification

An attorney must file a signed certification confirming personal review, verification of accuracy and completeness through individual legal judgment, and no sole reliance on AI output.

- 3. Certification Requirement: An Attorney must file a signed certification attesting that: - • Have personally reviewed the discovery compliance; - • Have verified that the answers and responses are accurate and complete based on personal/individual legal judgment; and - • Not relying solely on the AI tool's output to determine the sufficiency or completeness of the responses. (See attached Sample Certification Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Discovery Responses, APPENDIX 1).

CRITICAL

Applies to

Filing

Filings prepared with generative AI must receive diligent, thorough review for factual, ethical, and legal accuracy before submission.

Counsel and self-represented litigants must make all diligent efforts to ensure that any filings prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence is genuinely and thoroughly reviewed for factual, ethical, and legal accuracy prior to submission to the Court and in the matter.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

Parties using TAR to identify discovery documents must notify opposing counsel in their response that they used the technology.

Parties utilizing TAR software (also called predictive coding, computer assisted review, or supervised machine learning) to search and identify relevant documents to disclose during the discovery process must notify opposing counsel in their response that the documents have been identified by use of this technology.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

AI-generated discovery responses must be verified for factual accuracy, legal sufficiency, and compliance with applicable rules and professional conduct obligations.

Any discovery responses, including but not limited to Answers to Interrogatories, Rule 213(f) Disclosures, and Rule 214 Document Productions, that are generated, in whole or in part, using artificial intelligence (AI) tools must be verified for factual accuracy, legal sufficiency, and compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules and Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Expert report

An expert relying on AI must explain the AI system, its application and training, how it reached its result, and why it is reliable in the expert's report.

If any expert witness relies on AI or AI-generated data or tools in forming their opinions, their report shall include a detailed description of the AI used, how it was applied, and a demonstration of its reliability in forming those opinions. An expert submitting or utilizing AI content must explain in non-technical yet substantive terms the following: the system that was used in its creation; explain and describe any algorithms used; how and with what input such system was trained; whether the system is open or closed; how the system reached its particular decision, recommendation, or prediction; and why the training and system are reliable and trustworthy.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery

If AI or TAR is used for document review or interrogatory preparation, the responding party must disclose the method upon request and ensure adequate validation and human oversight.

If AI or Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) is used to aid in document review or interrogatory preparation, the responding party must disclose the method used upon request and ensure adequate validation and human oversight.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Case management order

All Case Management Orders must include the disclosure deadlines for AI-enhanced or generated evidence and Expert Report Disclosures.

The above referenced disclosure deadlines for AI enhanced or generated evidence as well as Expert Report Disclosures shall be included in all Case Management Orders.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Certification

Attorneys must file a signed certification confirming their personal review, verification of accuracy and completeness, and independent judgment about the sufficiency of AI-assisted discovery responses.

3. Certification Requirement: Attorneys must file a signed certification attesting that: - • They have personally reviewed the discovery responses; - • They have verified that the answers are accurate and complete based on their own legal judgment; - • They are not relying solely on the AI tool's output to determine the sufficiency or completeness of the responses. (See attached Sample Certification Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Discovery Responses, APPENDIX 1)

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

Must include

ai disclosure

Parties using TAR to identify relevant discovery documents must disclose that use to opposing counsel in their response.

Parties utilizing TAR software (also called predictive coding, computer assisted review, or supervised machine learning) to search and identify relevant documents to disclose during the discovery process must notify opposing counsel in their response that the documents were identified thru use of this technology.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Discovery response

Discovery responses generated with AI must be verified for factual accuracy, legal sufficiency, and compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules.

Any discovery responses, including but not limited to answers to interrogatories, Rule 213(f) disclosures, and Rule 214 document productions, that are generated in whole or in part using artificial intelligence (AI) tools must be verified for factual accuracy, legal sufficiency, and compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Expert report

An expert report relying on AI must describe the AI, its use, training, operation, and reliability in enough detail to permit meaningful cross-examination.

b. Expert Use of AI Generated or Enhanced Evidence- If any expert witness relies on AI or AI-generated data or tools in forming their opinions, their report shall include a detailed description of the AI used, how it was applied, and a demonstration of its reliability in forming those opinions. An expert submitting or utilizing AI content must explain in non-technical yet substantive terms the system that was used in its creation; explain and describe any algorithms used, how and with what input that system was trained, whether the system is open or closed; how the system reached its particular decision, recommendation, or prediction; and why the training and system is reliable and trustworthy. In sum, the methodology and operation of the AI tool must be transparent to the extent that opposing parties have a fair opportunity to cross-examine the expert regarding the AI tool's processes and decision-making pathways based on the information it is given; and potential biases or limitations inherent in the AI tool.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Affidavit

The disclosure affidavit must identify the AI-generated or enhanced portions and technology, explain the process, certify human accuracy review, document reliability and validity, verify preservation of the original and processed evidence and algorithm, and attach the original evidence.

At least ninety (90) days prior to trial, any party that seeks to introduce evidence enhanced or generated by an artificial intelligence program shall give timely notice and disclose such evidence to the opposing party via affidavit of the attorney or analyst with the following: - 1. That Exhibit "X" is evidence that was enhanced or generated by technology utilizing AI, specifically describing what portion of the evidence was generated or enhanced; - 2. Name or describe what technology was used to enhance the evidence, the date it was enhanced or generated, how it operates, and what steps were taken to enhance the evidence with that technology, any algorithm used to enhance or create the evidence; - 3. Certification that the evidence was reviewed by a human for accuracy; - 4. Documentation (or a description of the method used) to demonstrate the AI tool's reliability and validity in producing or enhancing the evidence; - 5. Verification that the evidence and the algorithm used to create or enhance the evidence has been preserved in its original and AI-processed form; and - 6. Attach a copy of the original version of the evidence in addition to any enhanced version of the evidence.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Challenge notice

A challenge notice to opposing counsel must identify the challenged evidence and proffer a sufficient factual basis to overcome the proponent's certification.

Any party contesting the disclosure and use of AI enhancement or generation of evidence after receiving this notice must within thirty (30) days of disclosure provide opposing counsel with notice challenging the evidence and proffering a sufficient factual basis to overcome the proponent's certification.

CRITICAL

Applies to

Ai use disclosure

A party planning to use AI or algorithmic tools for juror profiling, social-media analysis, or selection strategy must disclose the use before voir dire and identify the tool and data it analyzes.

Any party intending to use artificial intelligence or algorithmic tools for juror profiling, social media analysis or selection strategy must disclose such use in advance of voir dire. The disclosure shall identify the nature of the tool, and what public or private data it analyzes.