AI disclosure orders tracker

generative artificial intelligence will before submission, verified by an attorney licensed in Texas or self-represented litigant as legally accurate and that the attorney of record or self-represented litigant understands and acknowledges that they are responsible for their failure to comply with this order.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Claude) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer's Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer's Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate 11 declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

If any party or attorney uses an artificial intelligence tool in the preparation of any filing, the submission of that document signifies that the individual responsible for the filing has certified that she/he reviewed all source material and verified the accuracy of any AI content. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses any form of generative artificial intelligence to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses any form of generative artificial intelligence to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any party to this proceeding that uses a generative artificial intelligence platform (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Harvey, Protégé, and CoCounsel) (“Generative AI”) in connection with a filing in this matter must attach to the subject filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of Generative AI and certifying that the filer, in the exercise of the filer’s independent legal judgment, has reviewed and verified the content of the filing as accurate and in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. The declaration must identify which, if any, portion of [...]

Declaration Certifying Artificial Intelligence Use or Non-Use: All motions require attaching a separate declaration, adhering to the requirements in Section 1(a) of this Court’s Standing Order, certifying the filer’s use or non-use of generative AI in preparing the filing. The Court may strike any filing that does not comply with this requirement.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

Any filing prepared using AI should indicate as such on its caption title.

Any filing prepared using AI should indicate as such on its caption title. Any party who uses AI to generate any portion of a filing, must attach to that filing a separate declaration that, in a clear and plain factual statement: (1) discloses the use of AI, (2) certifies that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified the accuracy of all content and each citation in the filing and (3) specifies which portions of the filing were prepared using AI. Such certifications should be made by a litigant’s [...]

Any brief prepared with the assistance of AI shall state on page 1 thereof: “Created by or with the assistance of AI.” There is an ethical obligation not to submit “hallucination” case citations to this Court.

any document (motion, brief, affidavit, etc.) filed in any case before this Court that was created in any part with the assistance or use of AI (including, but not limited to: research, writing, editing of the document, or analysis of an opposition's document) shall contain within the document itself a statement that AI was used in the document's creation or analysis.

A party submitting any document, motion, brief, or memoranda to the Court must disclose in writing on the submitted document that AI was used in the creation of the document and that the party has verified the existence and accuracy of any authority cited.

Per the Illinois Supreme Court Policy on Artificial Intelligence, this Court does not require a party submitting any pleading to disclose the use of AI in the pleading's creation. However, use of AI in other filings must be disclosed in writing on the submitted document.

If any attorney or pro se litigant uses AI in formulating a filing, they must include within the filing a disclosure explaining that they used AI and how they used AI.

I further certify that no portion of any filing in this case will be drafted by generative artificial intelligence or that any language drafted by generative artificial intelligence—including quotations, citations, paraphrased assertions, and legal analysis—will be checked for accuracy, using print reporters or traditional legal databases, by a human being before it is submitted to the Court.

The use of any GAI (e.g., OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, or any legal tools leveraging GAI) in any court filings requires a mandatory certification that the GAI work product was diligently reviewed by a human being for accuracy and applicability. This review should include, but not be limited to, correcting errors and eliminating hallucinations. A failure to comply with this requirement may result in sanctions, such as the filing being stricken, and/or a referral to a bar disciplinary committee.

Any party or counsel that uses generative artificial intelligence (excluding Westlaw and LexisNexis) in any filing either addressed to or to be decided by Judge Quinn shall file a certification with that document, stating that all legal and factual citations in the document(s) have been checked for accuracy.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Generated Exhibits and Illustrative Aids: Parties must provide written pre-trial notice of AI generated exhibits and illustrative aids, and such exhibits must also be identified on the exhibit lists submitted by the parties as AI Generated.

Consistent with Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the certifications required thereunder, any attorney for a party, or any pro se party, who has used AI in the preparation of any documents filed with the Court must disclose that AI has been used and must further certify in the document that the person has checked the accuracy of any portion of the document drafted by generative AI, including all citations and legal authority.

Any attorney for a party or any pro se party who uses generative artificial intelligence ("A.I.") to prepare any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court in a matter assigned to Judge Goldner Cinquanto shall: (1) disclose that generative artificial intelligence was used to prepare the filing; (2) identify precisely what portion or portions of the filing was generated by A.I.; (3) identify the A.I. tool that was used; and (4) certify that each and every citation to the law or the record in the filing [...]

Parties who use Artificial Intelligence in preparing papers filed with the Court must declare the use of AI, which AI was used and must certify that the signer checked that all cited authorities are proper.

Any attorney or pro se party who uses generative artificial intelligence (“A.I.”) to prepare any complaint, answer, motion, brief or other paper filed with the Court shall: (1) disclose that generative artificial intelligence was used to prepare the filing; (2) identify precisely what portion or portions of the document contain the generated content; (3) identify the specific tool used and how it was used; and (4) certify that each any every citation to the law or the record in the filing was verified as accurate in accordance with the obligations [...]

Any attorney for a party or any pro se party who uses generative artificial intelligence (“A.I.”) to prepare any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court in a matter assigned to Judge Arteaga shall: (1) disclose that generative artificial intelligence was used to prepare the filing; (2) identify precisely what portion or portions of the used; and (4) certify that each and every citation to the law or the record in the filing was verified as accurate in accordance with the obligations set forth in Rule [...]

If any attorney for a party, or a pro se party, has used generative Artificial Intelligence ("AI")—including but not limited to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or any other program that uses machine learning to create new content—in a citation of any legal authority filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Kai N. Scott, then they MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that generative AI has been used to assist with the citation of legal authority, disclose what specific generative AI program was used, and CERTIFY that each [...]

If any attorney for a party, or a pro se party, has used Artificial Intelligence ("AI") in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper, filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Michael M. Baylson, MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in any way in the preparation of the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney for a party, or a pro se party, has used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper, filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Michael M. Baylson, MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in any way in the preparation of the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney for a party, or a pro se party (in both civil and criminal cases), has used generative Artificial Intelligence (“AI”)—including but not limited to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or any other program that uses machine learning to create new content—in a citation of any legal authority filed with the Court, and assigned or referred to Judge Scott W. Reid, then they MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that generative AI has been used to assist with the citation of legal authority, disclose what specific generative [...]

The court presumes that a party who files a document that does not contain this certification certifies that no part of the document was prepared using generative artificial intelligence.

If a party utilizes AI to draft or assist in drafting a pleading, the party must include with the pleading a "Certificate of Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage." The certificate must disclose the use of AI and certify that the party has independently verified the accuracy of any portion of the document drafted or assisted by the tool. The party must further certify that the use of AI has not resulted in the disclosure of confidential or privileged information to an unauthorized party.

Any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any generative artificial intelligence tool in the preparation of a pleading, motion, memorandum, response, proposed order, or other court record, must disclose such use on the face of the filing.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ("AI") It must state at the beginning or at the end of the motion that the party has used AI to draft or assist in drafting their motion. Any party using AI, by signing the document, is affirming that they have verified that all of the caselaw and statute numbers are correct, applicable and existing and that all the facts are correct. Failure to comply with the above may result in sanctions by the Court.

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were, before submission, verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being; and 2. that the self-represented litigant or attorney submitting such information understands and acknowledges that [...]

An attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any generative artificial intelligence tool in the preparation of a pleading, motion, memorandum, response, proposed order or other court document, must disclose such use on the face of the filing.

**If any Generative AI is used, you must note its use on the pleading to the Court.**

**If any Generative AI is used, you must note its use on the pleading to the Court.**

If any Generative AI is used, you must note its use on the pleading to the Court.

IF ANY GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY IS USED IN PRODUCING A PLEADING OR MOTION IT MUST BE NOTED ON THE FACE OF THE PLEADING OR MOTION.

THE USE OF GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OF PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS SUBMITTED TO THE COURT WILL BE NOTED ON THE FACE OF THE PLEADING OR MOTION.

By filing any pleading, motion, or other document with this Court, each signer represents that they have read the document, there are good grounds to support it, it is not interposed for delay, and the legal authorities identified exist and are accurately cited. These responsibilities apply regardless of whether artificial intelligence tools were used. Sanctions may be imposed for any filing inconsistent with these representations.

Use of non-generative AI features in traditional legal research databases or editing software need not be disclosed under these requirements, as these tools do not generate content in the manner of generative AI.

Artificial Intelligence Certificate I certify that I have used artificial intelligence (“AI”) to generate content or conduct research as follows [identify sections or topics] and that prior to filing this document, I have reviewed and verified the accuracy of the artificial intelligence, and the Court may consider and rely upon that content generated by artificial intelligence when ruling. I have confirmed as genuine all citations and quotations from AI outputs.

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, and 2. that the person understands and [...]

2. All information created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence- including language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis-was before submission to this Court verified as accurate using traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being.

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall, before using any AI-generated information in a Court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language drafted, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or supplied by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, by a human being or attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, and 2. that the [...]

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, and 2. that the person understands and [...]

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being, and 2. that the self-represented litigant or attorneys submitting such information understands and acknowledges that [...]

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall, before using any AI-generated information in a Court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language drafted, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or supplied by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, by a human being or attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, and 2. that the [...]

I have used ___________________________ (list Generative AI programs used) in either my work product, research, and/or drafting of this pleading before the Court.

I have used ___________________________ (list Generative AI programs used) in either my work product, research, and/or drafting of this pleading before the Court.

Any party that has used artificial intelligence, including, but not limited to, ChatGPT, CoCounsel, or Lexis+ AI, in the preparation of any document filed with or submitted to the court shall advise the court of that fact in said document.

A Party does not use AI. If a party does not use any AI in the drafting of the papers submitted to the Court, the party shall submit an affirmation certifying that that no AI was used in the preparation of the party’s papers submitted to the Court.

Any party that has used artificial intelligence (AI), including but no limited to ChatGPT, CoCounsel and Lexis+AI, in the preparation of any documents filed with or submitted to the Court shall advise the Court of that fact in said document.

Accordingly, any attorney or party who uses an artificial intelligence tool, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(a), in preparing any paper, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(b), filed in or submitted to this court or served on another party in a case before this court is required to carefully review the paper and independently ensure that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing such paper, an attorney or party certifies that such a review has been conducted and that the paper contains no such [...]

should counsel or the parties use any AI resources or material (e.g. ChatGPT), they must adhere to the following 3 conditions: (1) They must disclose and /or certify that any use identifies the AI program;(2) They must identify the portion of the filing drafted by AI; and (3) They must certify that the AI work product was reviewed by a human being for accuracy and applicability.

If the certification states a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program must be identified and the documents which include matter generated by the program must be specified along with which parts of the documents were drafted by the program.

Accordingly, any attorney or party who uses an AI tool, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(a), in preparing any paper, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(b), filed in or submitted to this Court or served on another party in a case before this Court is required to carefully review the paper and independently ensure that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing such paper, an attorney or party certifies that such a review has been conducted and that the paper contains no such fabricated [...]

Substantial use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) beyond spelling, grammar corrections, sentence structure in court submissions must be disclosed to court in a separate letter. Parties must ensure case cites and propositions are accurate and based on real cases.

If the certification states a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program must be identified and the documents which include matter generated by the program must be specified along with which parts of the documents were drafted by the program.

If the certification states a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program must be identified and the documents which include matter generated by the program must be specified along with which parts of the documents were drafted by the program. One certification pertaining to a party’s submission comprised of several such documents shall suffice.

As part of all submissions, counsel shall provide an affirmation disclosing whether artificial intelligence was utilized in preparation of this document and attesting that all legal arguments and cited authorities have been independently verified by the attorney and that no fictitious or non-existent case law has been relied upon.

Counsel must upload a certification that Artificial Intelligence (AI) has not been used.

Any party, whether appearing pro se or through counsel, which utilizes any generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) tool (for example, Chat GPT, Westlaw CoCounsel, or Lexis +AI) in preparation of any documents to be filed with the Court must disclose in the document that AI was used and the specific AI tool that was used. The unrepresented party or attorney must further certify in the document that the person has checked the accuracy of any portion of the document drafted by generative AI, including all citations, legal authority, and the recitation [...]

All submissions to the court containing legal authority citations must include a certification by the attorney or the self-represented party, indicating either 1) that no generative artificial intelligence program or tool was used in the drafting of any pleading, affidavit, affirmation, memorandum of law, brief, or other submission, or 2) that a generative artificial intelligence program or tool was used in the drafting of any pleading, affidavit, affirmation, memorandum of law, brief, or other submission, and affirm that all generated text, including citations, quotation, and legal analysis, was reviewed for [...]

An attorney or pro-se party who has used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) to prepare any document submitted to the court must also submit a certification setting forth (i) the specific AI program(s) used in preparation of the document; and (ii) that the accuracy of the portion of the document created using AI has been confirmed.

Counsel must upload a certification that Artificial Intelligence (AI) has not been used.

If the certification states a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program must be identified and the documents which include matter generated by the program

Any attorney or party who uses a generative AI tool, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(b), in preparing any paper, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2(c), filed in or submitted to this court or served on another party in a case before this court is required to carefully review the paper and independently ensure that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing such paper, an attorney or party certifies that such a review has been conducted and that the paper contains no such fabricated [...]

Any attorney or party who employs a generative artificial intelligence tool, as defined in 22 NYCRR § 161.2(b), in the preparation of any paper, as defined in 22 NYCRR § 161.2(c), that is filed with or submitted to this court, or served upon another party in an action before this court, shall carefully review the paper and independently verify that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing such paper, the attorney or party certifies that this review has been conducted and the submission is [...]

Artificial intelligence (AI) programs: All submissions with respect to a motion must include a certification by an attorney (or self-represented party) either that no generative artificial intelligence program was used in the drafting of any affidavit, affirmation, or memorandum of law contained within the submission, or that a generative artificial intelligence program was used but all generated text, including citations, quotations, and legal analysis were reviewed for accuracy and approved by an attorney (or the self-represented party). If the certification states a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program [...]

Any audio or video evidence that was created or altered by an artificial intelligence tool must additionally be identified in accordance with the ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) PROGRAMS section of these Rules.

If the certification states that a generative artificial intelligence program was used, the program must be identified and the documents which include matter generated by the program must be specified along with which parts of the documents were drafted by the program.

L. Artificial Intelligence Counsel and any self-represented party must disclose to the court if any portion of their written submission to the Court was generated by any form of artificial intelligence and if so, what portion thereof utilized this form of technology.

Accordingly, any attorney or party who uses an artificial intelligence tool, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2 (a), in preparing any paper, as defined in 22 NYCRR 161.2 (b), filed in or submitted to this court or served on another party in a case before this court is required to carefully review the paper and independently ensure that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing such paper, an attorney or party certifies that such a review has been conducted and that the paper contains [...]

Any attorney for a party, or any pro se party, who has used AI in the preparation or drafting of any documents filed with the court must disclose that AI has been used and must further certify in the document that the person has checked the accuracy

Every party must disclose whether their expert relied upon AI (Artificial Intelligence) in reaching their opinion.

Any attorney or self- represented party who uses an artificial intelligence tool in preparing any paper filed in or submitted to this Court or served on another party in a case pending before this Court is required to carefully review the paper and independently ensure that it contains no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material. By signing a paper and submitting it to this Court, counsel and self-represented parties certify that a review has been conducted and that the paper does not contain any fabricated or fictitious content, [...]

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI-generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI-generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI-generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

1. I have disclosed on the face of this filing whether any portion of the document was drafted, edited, or otherwise produced with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) technology.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI-generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

However, if any party ===== PAGE 18 ===== or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Bain or Division 24-B, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that regenerative AI has been used in the filing, state whether the AI used was close or open, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate.

However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Sandor or Division 48, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate.

if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge McCarthy or Division 30, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate.

However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, the party must in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and certify that each citation to the law or the record in the paper has been independently verified as accurate.

However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, the party must in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and certify that each citation to the law or the record in the paper has been independently verified as accurate.

The Court does not prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in its division. However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Skipper or Division 43, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate.

However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate.

The Court does not prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in its division. However, if any party or self-represented party has used AI in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Snure or Division 17, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been independently verified as accurate. Failure [...]

Any submission containing AI-generated content must include a certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified the content's accuracy.

Any submission containing AI-generated content must include a certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified the content’s accuracy.

Use of generative artificial intelligence tools is not prohibited, but counsel must personally confirm for themselves the accuracy of any research conducted by these means, and counsel alone bears ethical responsibility for all statements made in filings. Any submission containing AI- generated content must include a certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified the content’s accuracy. Failure to include this certification or comply with this verification requirement will be grounds for sanctions.

If a Party or counsel seeks to file or otherwise present to the Court any such AI-generated evidentiary material, no such material shall be considered unless previously disclosed or produced timely in discovery

The signature of counsel or a self-represented party on any submission containing AI- generated content, including citations generated by AI, constitutes a certification that the signing attorney (or self-represented party) has personally verified the content’s accuracy.

Any billing statements submitted for review of the Court must indicate AI usage when applicable.

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Texas, and 2. that the person understands and [...]

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any Al-g-e!€rated llfornqatian in a court submissio[ or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certiffing that: l. all language, quotations, sources, citation$, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-Al) legal sources by a human being, and Z. that the self-represented litigant or attorneys submitting such information understands and acknowledges that [...]

I, an attorney or self-represented litigant in the ____ Judicial District Court, hereby certify as follows: 1. I reviewed and understand this Court's Standing Order Regarding Artificial Intelligence. I will comply with the Standing Order throughout this case. 2. All information created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence—including language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis—was before submission to this Court verified as accurate using traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being. 3. I understand that I will be held responsible and subject to possible sanction under Texas [...]

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in connection with a case shall before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding sign and submit the attached form, certifying that: 1. all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being, and 2. that the self-represented litigant or attorneys submitting such information understands and acknowledges that [...]

However, all filing, motion or other pleading that has been drafted, in whole or in part, with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence tool shall specifically identify the specific tool used in the drafting (including but not limited to Harvey AI; Lexis+ AI; AI.Law; Co-Counsel by Thomson Reuters; Drafting Assistant by Westlaw; ChatGPT by OpenAI; Claude AI by Anthropic; Microsoft Copilot; etc.)

Broward County Administrative Order 2026-03-Gen requires the following language on all Motions written with artificial intelligence assistance: The undersigned hereby certifies that generative artificial intelligence was used in the preparation of this submission. The undersigned certifies that s/he has read and verified the accuracy of every citation to the law and/or the record, and the accuracy of any language drafted by generative artificial intelligence, including quotations, citations, paraphrased assertions, facts, and legal analysis, and accepts full responsibility for the contents of this submission.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI-generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content's accuracy. Failure to include this certification or comply with this verification requirement will be grounds for sanctions, as permitted by law.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI - generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content's accuracy. Failure to include this certification or comply with this verification requirement will be grounds for sanctions, as permitted by law.

If any attorney or pro se party submits any filing or submission containing AI-generated content to the court, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also include a certification that they have personally reviewed and verified the content's accuracy. Failing to include this certification or to comply with these verification requirements will be grounds for sanctions, as permitted by law.

Any attorney or pro se party who used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the preparation of the complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the court MUST disclose in a clear and plain factual statement that AI was used. The party MUST CERTIFY that every citation to the law or the record in the paper is accurate.

If any attorney for a party or a pro se party has used Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, assigned to Judge Peffer, MUST in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used in any way in the filing, and CERTIFY that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate, the order stated.

When AI has been used or assisted in the use of preparation, researching, drafting pleadings, drafting documents, filing documents, and/or discovery requests, the document shall identify the specific tool used in such manner.

and plain factual statement, disclose that AI has been used and certify all citations to the law or the record have been verified as accurate.

Counsel shall serve a notice to the opposing party identifying AI-generated evidentiary material with sufficient specificity to locate it (i.e., via production number, attaching a copy to the notice, providing a copy on request). This notice should be served with the production or disclosure of any AI-generated evidentiary material.

Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a motion, brief, pleading, or other filing must attach to the filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of artificial intelligence and certifying that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.

describing in detail the steps taken to verify the accuracy of all legal authorities and factual assertions generated by the tool. Pro se litigants remain individually responsible for verifying the accuracy of any output produced by an artificial intelligence tool, and a litigant’s failure to review an artificial intelligence-generated filing for accuracy, or to provide the required certification, violates this Rule. The Court may strike any filing that fails to comply with this Rule.

If any attorney or pro se litigant uses an artificial intelligence tool in preparing any filing, the filing must include a signed certification (i) explaining how the tool was used, (ii) stating whether the attorney or litigant personally reviewed the filing for accuracy of cited legal authorities and factual assertions, and (iii) if so, describing in detail the steps taken to verify the accuracy of all legal authorities and factual assertions generated by the tool.

Counsel is responsible for providing the Court with complete and accurate representations of the record, the procedural history of the case, and any cited legal authorities. All litigants are responsible for verifying the accuracy of any output produced in whole or in part by an AI tool. Any attorney who signs a filing for which an AI tool was used to prepare (including by appearing on the signature block of the filing) must attach to the filing a signed certification (i) stating whether the litigant personally reviewed the filing for [...]

If a pro se litigant uses an AI tool in preparing any filing, the litigant must attached to the filing a signed certification (i) stating whether the litigant personally reviewed the filing for accuracy of cited legal authorities and factual assertions and (ii) if so, describing in detail the steps taken to verify the accuracy of all legal authorities and factual assertions generated by the AI tool.

Any party utilizing an AI tool in drafting a document which is to be submitted to the Court must inform the Court of its use and identify which portion of the document was created or generated with the use of the AI tool.

I, or someone under my supervision, used an artificial intelligence (“AI”) tool in preparing the filing submitted in the above-captioned case on _______ [insert date] and titled ____________ [insert title] at Doc. __ [insert document number]. I further certify that:

All attorneys and pro se litigants appearing before the Court must, together with their proposed scheduling order, file a certificate attesting either that no portion of any filing will be drafted by generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Harvey.AI, or Google Bard) or that any language drafted by generative artificial intelligence will be checked for accuracy, using print reporters or traditional legal databases, by a person.

All attorneys and pro se litigants appearing before the Court must, together with their proposed scheduling order, file a certificate attesting either that no portion of any filing will be drafted by generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Harvey.AI, or Google Bard) or that any language drafted by generative artificial intelligence will be checked for accuracy, using print reporters or traditional legal databases, by a person.

certificate within each pleading generated utilizing artificial intelligence, certifying that; 1. All language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were, before submission verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and 2. That the person understands and acknowledges that they are and will be held responsible, and potentially sanctioned, for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply with this Order.

The signature or listing of counsel or a self-represented party on a filing containing AI- generated content, including citations generated by AI, constitutes a certification the signer (and any attorney or other self-represented party listed on the filing) has personally verified the content’s accuracy.

Parties and attorneys filing any paper with the court—application, brief, motion, pleading, etc.—must disclose whether they have used artificial intelligence (AI) in the preparation of that paper, and must verify that they have checked the accuracy of all AI-produced work product included in the paper.

If a Party or counsel seeks to file or otherwise present to the Court any such AI-generated evidentiary material, no such material shall be considered unless previously disclosed as AI generated.

Any exhibit, demonstrative, or other material to be filed or presented to the Court which was created or drafted with any assistance or use of an AI tool shall be identified as such in its title or caption, in a table preceding the body of exhibit, demonstrative, or other material, and by a separate Notice filed contemporaneously with the document or material.

Any brief, pleading, or other document submitted to the Court the text of which was created or drafted with any use of an AI tool shall be identified as such in its title or pleading caption, in a table preceding the body text of such brief or pleading, or by a separate Notice filed contemporaneously with the brief, pleading, or document.

Any exhibit, demonstrative, or other material to be filed or presented to the Court which was created or drafted with any assistance or use of an Al tool shall be identified as suchin its title or caption, in a table preceding the body of exhibit, demonstrative, or other material, and by a separate Notice filed contemporaneously with the document or material.

If a Party or counsel seeks to file or otherwise present to the Court any such Al-generated evidentiary material, no such material shall be considered unless previously disclosed as Al generated.

Any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses an AI tool to prepare, draft, or review filing shall disclose such use in the document with the following certification: a This document was generated with the assistance of [identify AI tool(s) used, e.g, Chat GPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc]. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that, despite reliance on an AI tool, I have independently reviewed this document to confirm accuracy, legitimacy, and use of good and applicable law. Specifically, I have verified that every citation to law, case, statute, or the [...]

Certification: Any attorney or pro se litigant who uses AI in any capacity to prepare, draft, or review a filing shall disclose such use in the document with the following certification: This document was generated with the assistance of [identify AI tool(s) used, e.g., Chat GPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc.]. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that, despite reliance on an AI tool, I have independently reviewed this document to confirm accuracy, legitimacy, and use of good and applicable law. Page 1 of 2 I hereby certify under penalty of [...]

All parties should note whether artificial intelligence (AI) was used to prepare or draft a filing in this Court at the end of each filing.

Certification: Any attorney or pro se litigant who uses Al in any capacity to prepare, draft, or review a filing shall disclose such use in the document with the following certification: This document was generated with the assistance of [identify Al tool(s) used, e.g., Chat GPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc. ]. | hereby certify under penalty of perjury that, despite reliance on an Al tool, have independently reviewed this document to confirm | accuracy, legitimacy, and use of good and applicable law. Page 1 of 2 | hereby certify under penalty [...]

se litigants): Certification: Any attorney or pro se litigant who uses Al in any capacity to prepare, draft, or review a filing shall disclose such use in the document with the following certification: This document was generated with the assistance of [identify Al tool(s) used, e.g., Chat GPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc.1. | hereby certify under penalty of perjury that, despite reliance on an Al tool, have independently reviewed this document to confirm accuracy, legitimacy, and use of good and applicable law. | hereby certify under penalty of perjury that every [...]

Any attorney or pro-se party who uses AI in any capacity to prepare, draft, or review a filing or submission to the Court shall disclose such use in the document with the following certification: This document was generated with the assistance of [identify Al tool(s) used, e.g., Chat GPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc. ]. I hereby certify under penalty ofperjury that, despite reliance on an AI tool, I have independently reviewed this document to confirm accuracy, legitimacy, and use ofgood and applicable law. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that [...]

All counsel and *pro se* parties must disclose the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in any capacity to prepare documents submitted to the Court. If AI was used in any way to prepare a filing or submission to the Court or chambers, counsel and/or *pro se* parties are **REQUIRED** to sign and file a Disclosure of Use of Artificial Intelligence at the end of said document, before the signature block, stating as follows:

All counsel and pro se parties must disclose the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in any capacity to prepare documents submitted to the Court by including the following disclosure within the certificate of service: "This document was generated with the assistance of [identify AI tool name]. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that, despite reliance on an AI tool, I have independently reviewed this document to confirm accuracy, legitimacy, and use of good and applicable law."

Parties must disclose the use of AI.

If any attorney or pro se party has used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Marlewski, MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclosure that AI has been used in any way in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney for a party, or self- represented party used AI in any way in the preparation of any paper filed with the court, and assigned to Division I, shall in a clear and plain factual statement, disclose that AI was used and certify that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy. Failure to include this certification or comply with this verification requirement will be grounds for sanctions, as permitted by law.

If any attorney or pro se party has used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, and assigned to Judge Daniel, MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclosure that AI has been used in any way in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper, has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

If any attorney for a Party or an unrepresented Party uses AI in the preparation of any document, materials, or exhibits (collectively “Document”), filed with the Clerk or submitted to the Court, said Document must, in a clear and plain statement: Disclose that AI has been used in the preparation of the Document and Certify that each and every citation or reference to any case law, rule, statute, or other authority in the Document has been verified as accurate.

If any attorney or pro se party submits to the court any filing or submission containing AI generated content, that attorney or pro se party must disclose the use of artificial intelligence on the face of the document and also must include a certification that the attorney or pro se party has personally reviewed and verified the content’s accuracy.

for any case assigned to Judge Polo, if any attorney or pro se party has used Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the preparation of any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court, the party MUST, in a clear and plain factual statement, disclosure that AI has been used in any way in the filing, and CERTIFY, that each and every citation to the law or the record in the paper has been verified as accurate.

If counsel utilizes generative artificial intelligence to draft or assist in drafting a pleading, counsel must include with the pleading a “Certificate of Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage,” an example of which is appended to this Standing Order as Appendix C. The certificate must disclose the use of generative artificial intelligence and certify that counsel has independently verified the accuracy of any portion of the document drafted or assisted by the tool. Counsel must further certify that the use of generative artificial intelligence has not resulted in the disclosure of confidential [...]

- 2. All information created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence – including language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis – was before submission to the Court verified as accurate using traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being.

All self-represented litigants and attorneys who utilize any forms of artificial intelligence for legal research, drafting, or analysis in connection with a case before this Court shall, before using any AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the attached certification form, stating that: 1. All language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments, and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative artificial intelligence were, before submission, verified as accurate through traditional (non-AI) legal sources by a human being; and 2. The attorney or self-represented litigant submitting such information [...]