Members of the legal profession must meet ethical obligations and professional standards. Given the relative disruptions the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has caused for those in the practice of law, the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) decided that some guidance for attorneys on the subject might be a good idea.
On October 31, 2026, the New York State Bar Association’s House of Delegates adopted “Legal Ethics Guidelines for Lawyers’ Use of Artificial Intelligence” prepared by its Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies (AIETC). The guide addresses the ethical use of generative AI for attorneys practicing in the state. In addition to addressing AI chatbots and explaining when lawyers must disclose their use of AI, the report outlines how existing ethical rules apply to billing for AI-assisted work.
While law firms and courts are still trying to determine exactly what role AI will play in the legal world, it’s clear it isn’t destined to fade away quietly. By establishing detailed operational guidelines, from conflicts of interest and permitted billing to protecting attorney-client privilege and preventing the unauthorized practice of law, the AIETC’s tome may offer a model for other bar associations developing guidance on lawyers’ use of AI.
You Can’t Spell Plaintiff Without ‘AI’
AI has become a standard part of law practice management. The American Bar Association (ABA) reports that in 2026, 69% of legal professionals use some form of AI, up from 31% in 2025. General AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Claude are commonly employed for tasks such as correspondence, general research, summarizing documents, and brainstorming. AI tools designed specifically for legal tasks are also seeing increased use for document drafting and legal research. Almost 40% of respondents said they save between 1 and 5 hours per week using AI.
Saving time can free lawyers to take on other work, but AI also brings ethical and operational risks. Beyond data security issues and concerns about maintaining client confidentiality, AI has produced what some call a plague of incorrect citations and hallucinations in court filings.
Supporting Professional Judgment With Rules and Guidelines
The guidelines explain how the New York Rules of Professional Conduct (NYRPC) apply to attorneys’ use of AI. It treats the general cost of acquiring and maintaining AI tools as ordinary firm overhead. Reasonable AI-related expenses incurred for a client’s matter may be charged with the required disclosure. Lawyers billing hourly may charge only for time actually spent, including prompting and reviewing, verifying, or revising AI output, not for hours the technology saved. General training is not billable, although reasonable matter-specific adaptation or application may be.
An AI tool doesn’t create a conflict of interest on its own, but lawyers must ensure it doesn’t share information between clients or matters that should stay separate. Lawyers must independently verify authorities and quotations in AI-assisted court papers and comply with applicable court rules governing AI disclosure or certification.
Firms using these tools must review output generated by agentic AI systems to ensure it meets the profession’s ethical principles. This includes detecting bias a system may have gained from the source materials used during its training. Using AI chatbots doesn’t remove an attorney’s ethical responsibilities. Lawyers cannot use AI to evade restrictions on the unauthorized practice of law, and they remain responsible for the systems they deploy.
Will the guidelines created by New York’s AIETC prove helpful? While there may be rough patches as issues crop up, any move to better understand AI's use in the legal profession might be a step in the right direction. A reduction in legal hallucinations is a win for everyone.
