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 · UT

AI Rules for Lawyers in Utah 2026

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

Quick answer

Utah has not issued a formal AI ethics opinion. The Utah State Bar's AI Standing Committee publishes educational material, and the existing Rules of Professional Conduct govern AI use. There is no statewide rule requiring lawyers to disclose AI use, and the Utah Court of Appeals has already sanctioned lawyers for filing AI-fabricated citations, so verification is the controlling duty.

Ethics guidance

No formal AI ethics opinion; the existing Rules of Professional Conduct apply

As of September 2026

Utah has not adopted a formal numbered AI ethics opinion as of September 2026. The Ethics Advisory Opinion Committee's published index runs to Opinion 22-04 and lists nothing on generative AI.

What the Bar has published is educational: its AI Standing Committee and Innovation in Law Practice Committee run discussions and blog posts on practical tools, all of which stress that the lawyer remains responsible for every filing, whatever assisted in drafting it. That material is guidance, not an opinion, and the existing Rules of Professional Conduct govern.

Sources: Utah State Bar, Ethics Advisory Opinion Committee opinions index (no AI opinion listed; newest is 22-04), Utah State Bar blog, AI Tools Utah Lawyers Can Use Today (January 2026; educational post by committee members, not an ethics opinion)

Disclosure rules

Are Utah lawyers required to disclose AI use?

No Utah rule or ethics opinion requires lawyers to disclose AI use as a blanket matter. The Bar's educational material emphasises attorney review and responsibility rather than disclosure. Individual courts may set their own requirements.

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

Sources: Utah State Bar, Ethics Advisory Opinion Committee opinions index (no AI opinion listed; newest is 22-04), Utah State Bar blog, AI Tools Utah Lawyers Can Use Today (January 2026; educational post by committee members, not an ethics opinion)

Sanctions on record

AI hallucination sanctions in Utah

Utah has a sanction on record. In Garner v. Kadince (2025 UT App 80), the Utah Court of Appeals sanctioned attorneys who cited nonexistent AI-generated cases, ordering them to pay opposing fees, refund their client, and pay $1,000 to a legal-aid nonprofit. It was the first Utah court to address AI-fabricated citations.

Federal courts in Utah have continued the pattern since June 2026. In Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University et al. (D. Utah, September 2026), the court ordered two AI-ethics CLE courses and a $3,000 monetary sanction. In Hagan v. Black Diamond Experts, LLC (D. Utah, July 2026), the court issued an admonishment and a warning.

Sources: Garner v. Kadince, 2025 UT App 80 (Utah Court of Appeals, May 22, 2025), opinion (Utah Courts), AI Hallucination Cases Database, Utah cases (damiencharlotin.com)

Competence duty

The competence rule and AI (Rule 1.1)

The competence duty in Utah is Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1, with the comment on keeping abreast of the benefits and risks of relevant technology. Applied to AI, that means understanding a tool before relying on it and verifying its output.

Source: Utah Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.1 (Utah Courts, approved rules)

CLE requirements

Continuing legal education in Utah

Utah requires 12 CLE hours each year, including ethics and professionalism credit. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement as of June 2026.

Source: Utah State Bar, MCLE rules

How to stay compliant

A practical checklist for Utah lawyers

Utah has no formal AI opinion, but its appellate court has already sanctioned AI-fabricated citations, so verifying every cited case is the duty to take most seriously here.

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

Utah AI rules: common questions

Not as a blanket rule, but the Utah State Bar recommends disclosing AI use to clients and courts and obtaining informed consent where appropriate. Individual courts may set their own requirements.

Yes. In Garner v. Kadince (2025 UT App 80), the Utah Court of Appeals sanctioned attorneys for citing nonexistent AI-generated cases, ordering fees, a client refund, and a $1,000 nonprofit donation. It was the first Utah court to address AI-fabricated citations.

Utah Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1, with Comment 8 on the benefits and risks of relevant technology. The bar's AI opinion reads it to require understanding a tool and verifying its output.

No. Utah requires 12 CLE hours per year, including ethics and professionalism credit. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement.

Legal AI rules in nearby states

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

AI rules in ArizonaAI rules in CaliforniaAI rules in ColoradoAI rules in New MexicoAI rules in Washington

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 Utah state bar and the assigned court before you rely on anything here. Last verified September 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