AI rules by state · KY
AI Rules for Lawyers in Kentucky 2026
- AI disclosure required?
- Case-by-case
- Governing guidance
- KBA Ethics Op. E-457 (2024)
- Sanctions on record
- None in state courts
- Competence rule
- SCR 3.130(1.1)
- AI / technology CLE
- No tech or AI requirement
Quick answer
Kentucky does not require routine disclosure of AI use to clients, but its bar guidance treats disclosure as necessary when AI work is material or is outsourced to a third party. The Kentucky Bar Association's ethics opinion, issued in 2024, requires lawyers to verify every AI-generated authority and to maintain competence in the tools they use.
Ethics guidance
Kentucky Bar Association Ethics Opinion KBA E-457
Interim opinion, issued March 2024
Kentucky's guidance is KBA Ethics Opinion E-457, an interim opinion issued by the Kentucky Bar Association in March 2024 while a bar task force continues its work.
The opinion applies existing duties to AI. It requires lawyers to verify all AI-generated authorities before relying on them, to protect client confidentiality, and to maintain competence in any AI tool they use. It takes a notably strong view of competence, suggesting that a failure to use available technology can itself raise a competence concern. It also recommends that firms, including solo practitioners, adopt a written AI policy.
Source: Kentucky Bar Association, Ethics Opinion KBA E-457 (PDF)
Disclosure rules
Are Kentucky lawyers required to disclose AI use?
Kentucky does not mandate disclosure of routine AI use to clients. KBA E-457 treats client disclosure as required when AI work is material or is outsourced to a third party, and otherwise leaves it to the lawyer's judgment.
Kentucky has no statewide court rule requiring AI disclosure in filings, so counsel should review the assigned judge's standing order in each matter.
Source: Kentucky Bar Association, Ethics Opinion KBA E-457 (PDF)
Sanctions on record
AI hallucination sanctions in Kentucky
No Kentucky state-court AI-hallucination sanction is on record as of June 2026. A Kentucky-licensed attorney was sanctioned in a federal appeal before the Sixth Circuit for AI-misquoted citations, but that matter arose in federal court rather than a Kentucky state court. The verification duty applies regardless.
Source: Sixth Circuit sanctions attorneys for fabricated citations (appellate coverage)
Competence duty
The competence rule and AI (SCR 3.130(1.1))
The competence duty in Kentucky is Supreme Court Rule 3.130(1.1), which follows the ABA model and includes staying abreast of the benefits and risks of relevant technology. KBA E-457 reads this duty to require both an understanding of the AI tool and independent verification of its output.
Source: Kentucky Bar Association, Ethics Opinion KBA E-457 (PDF)
CLE requirements
Continuing legal education in Kentucky
Kentucky requires 12 CLE credits each year, including at least 2 hours of ethics. There is no AI or technology-specific CLE requirement as of June 2026, though AI programs can count toward the general requirement.
How to stay compliant
A practical checklist for Kentucky lawyers
Kentucky's bar reads competence to favor using AI well rather than avoiding it, so the duty here is to verify output and document a sensible AI policy.
Review the assigned judge's standing order and the court's local rules at the start of every matter. AI disclosure obligations generally sit at the court and judge level rather than in a single statewide rule.
Verify every citation and quotation before filing, and read the underlying authority. Most AI sanctions have resulted from citations the lawyer never personally verified.
Do not enter confidential client information into public AI tools without confirming how the tool handles data and, where there is material confidentiality risk, obtaining the client's informed consent.
Inform the client when AI use materially affects the matter, and honor any client instruction that limits AI use.
Bill only for time actually spent drafting prompts and reviewing output, not for time the tool saved.
Keep any required technology or AI continuing-education credit current, and treat AI competence as part of your duty under the competence rule.
When evaluating tools, look for citation grounding that ties output to verifiable authority, a vendor commitment not to train on client data, and audit trails. These reduce risk, but they do not replace the lawyer's own review.
Frequently asked
Kentucky AI rules: common questions
Legal AI rules in nearby states
Practising across state lines? Compare Kentucky’s rules with its neighbors.
This page is general information, not legal advice. Rules change, and the obligations that apply to your matter depend on your court, your judge, and your facts. Verify the current rules with the Kentucky state bar and the assigned court before you rely on anything here. Last verified June 2026.
Built for lawyers who have to verify everything
Irys grounds its output in verifiable authority, keeps client data out of training, and maintains a record of the work. See how it fits your practice.
Book a Demo