AI rules by state · NY
AI Rules for Lawyers in New York 2026
- AI disclosure required?
- No
- Governing guidance
- NYC Bar Formal Op. 2024-5
- Sanctions on record
- Mata v. Avianca (2023), $5,000
- Competence rule
- Rule 1.1, Comment 8
- AI / technology CLE
- 1 cybersecurity hour; no AI rule
Quick answer
New York does not require lawyers to disclose AI use to courts or clients. The New York City Bar's Formal Opinion 2024-5 sets guardrails rather than bright-line rules, and states that routine AI features need not be disclosed. What New York does require is verification. A lawyer remains fully responsible for AI output and must confirm that every citation and fact is accurate before it reaches a court or a client.
Ethics guidance
NYC Bar Formal Opinion 2024-5 and the NYSBA Task Force on AI Report
April and August 2024
New York has two principal reference points. The New York State Bar Association's Task Force on Artificial Intelligence published a Report and Recommendations adopted by its House of Delegates in April 2024. The report favors lawyer education over new regulation and addresses competence and confidentiality in the use of AI.
The New York City Bar Association's Professional Ethics Committee issued Formal Opinion 2024-5 in August 2024. It addresses the use of generative AI in practice and covers competence, confidentiality, the risk of fabricated output, and fees. The opinion frames its guidance as guardrails rather than bright-line rules, and it does not impose a duty to disclose routine AI use. Across both documents, the consistent message is that the lawyer remains responsible for the work and must verify what the tool produces.
Sources: NYC Bar Formal Opinion 2024-5, NYSBA Task Force on AI, Report and Recommendations (PDF)
Disclosure rules
Are New York lawyers required to disclose AI use?
New York does not mandate disclosure of AI use to courts or clients. Formal Opinion 2024-5 sets guardrails rather than bright-line rules, and states that routine AI uses, such as autocomplete or established legal-research tools, need not be disclosed.
No statewide court rule requires AI disclosure in filings. Individual judges in New York's federal districts have issued their own AI standing orders, so counsel should still review the assigned judge's rules in each matter.
Source: NYC Bar Formal Opinion 2024-5
Sanctions on record
AI hallucination sanctions in New York
New York is where the most widely cited AI-hallucination matter arose. In Mata v. Avianca, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2023), Judge P. Kevin Castel imposed a $5,000 sanction under Rule 11 on plaintiff's counsel who filed a brief citing six cases that ChatGPT had fabricated.
A second New York matter followed. In Park v. Kim (2d Cir. 2024), the court referred an attorney to its grievance panel after she relied on a nonexistent citation generated by ChatGPT. The court imposed no monetary penalty, but the disciplinary referral underscored that the duty to verify cannot be delegated.
Sources: Mata v. Avianca, Inc., S.D.N.Y. sanctions order docket (CourtListener), Park v. Kim, Second Circuit disciplinary referral (Volokh / Reason)
Competence duty
The competence rule and AI (Rule 1.1, Comment 8)
The governing rule is New York Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1, the duty of competence. New York adopted Comment 8 in 2015, which directs lawyers to stay abreast of the benefits and risks associated with technology. New York's AI guidance applies that technology-competence duty to generative AI, so a lawyer must understand a tool's limitations, including its tendency to fabricate, before relying on it.
Source: New York Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR Part 1200, PDF)
CLE requirements
Continuing legal education in New York
New York requires attorneys to complete 1 CLE credit in Cybersecurity, Privacy and Data Protection, a requirement that took effect in July 2023. New York was the first state to adopt a cybersecurity CLE requirement. There is no separate AI-specific CLE mandate as of June 2026, though AI training maps to the broader competence and technology obligations.
Source: New York Courts, Cybersecurity CLE requirement (PDF)
How to stay compliant
A practical checklist for New York lawyers
Mata v. Avianca arose in New York, so the state offers the clearest illustration of the consequences of filing unverified AI citations.
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
New York AI rules: common questions
Legal AI rules in nearby states
Practising across state lines? Compare New York’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 New York 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