Skip to main content
New: Introducing Irys Workbench, agents to take up the work for you. See Workbench
Book a DemoStart Free Trial

AI rules by state · OH

AI Rules for Lawyers in Ohio 2026

By Sabih Siddiqi, founder of Irys and former BigLaw litigatorVerified as of June 2026
AI disclosure required?Case-by-case
Competence ruleRule 1.1
AI / technology CLENo tech or AI requirement

Quick answer

Ohio does not require lawyers to disclose AI use as a general rule. The Ohio Board of Professional Conduct's AI ethics guide applies the existing duties to AI, and routine AI-assisted research generally needs no disclosure. The lawyer must verify every AI-generated citation before filing.

Ethics guidance

Ohio Board of Professional Conduct, AI Ethics Guide for Lawyers and Judicial Officers

2026

Ohio's reference point is the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct's ethics guide on artificial intelligence for lawyers and judicial officers, released in 2026.

The guide treats AI as a relevant technology under the competence rule. It directs lawyers to understand the tools, verify output, protect confidentiality, and bill fairly. Routine AI-assisted research generally needs no disclosure; disclosure matters more where AI shapes the work product or involves client data.

Source: Ohio Board of Professional Conduct, AI Ethics Guide (PDF)

Disclosure rules

Are Ohio lawyers required to disclose AI use?

Ohio has no statewide rule requiring disclosure of AI use. The Board's guide frames disclosure as situation-dependent and points lawyers to each court's own rules.

Counsel should review the assigned judge's standing order in each matter.

Source: Ohio Board of Professional Conduct, AI Ethics Guide (PDF)

Sanctions on record

AI hallucination sanctions in Ohio

No Ohio state-court AI-hallucination sanction is on record as of September 2026. In Kettering Adventist Healthcare v. Collier (S.D. Ohio, February 2026), a federal court found two attorneys in contempt, struck their brief and imposed a $7,500 sanction for filing fabricated AI citations, with a referral to the Ohio disciplinary authorities, but that matter arose in federal court rather than an Ohio state court.

Source: Kettering Adventist Healthcare v. Collier, No. 3:25-cv-00273 (S.D. Ohio), opinions and orders (U.S. Government Publishing Office)

Competence duty

The competence rule and AI (Rule 1.1)

The competence duty in Ohio is Ohio Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1. The Board's guide treats AI as a relevant technology, so competence includes understanding a tool's risks and verifying its output.

Source: Ohio Board of Professional Conduct, AI Ethics Guide (PDF)

CLE requirements

Continuing legal education in Ohio

Ohio requires 24 CLE hours every two years, including professional-conduct credit. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement as of June 2026.

Source: Supreme Court of Ohio, CLE

How to stay compliant

A practical checklist for Ohio lawyers

Ohio's Board of Professional Conduct has issued a formal AI guide, and its throughline is verifying AI output.

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

Ohio AI rules: common questions

Not as a general rule. The Ohio Board of Professional Conduct's AI guide treats routine AI-assisted research as needing no disclosure, and frames any disclosure as situation-dependent. There is no statewide rule requiring it.

Not in Ohio state courts as of June 2026. A federal court in the Southern District of Ohio sanctioned two attorneys, held them in contempt, and referred them to Ohio disciplinary authorities, but that arose in federal court.

Ohio Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1. The Board's guide treats AI as a relevant technology, so competence includes understanding a tool's risks and verifying its output.

No. Ohio requires 24 CLE hours every two years, including professional-conduct credit. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement.

Legal AI rules in nearby states

Practising across state lines? Compare Ohio’s rules with its neighbors.

AI rules in IllinoisAI rules in MichiganAI rules in MinnesotaAI rules in Missouri

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 Ohio 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