MO 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County): Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County), Local…
Court · Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit Court (Clay County)
Verified September 30, 2026
- Citation
- Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County), Local Rule 3.3.1: Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence Use
- Order date
- July 25, 2024
Summary
'Any person who submits a pleading or filing with the Court using any generative artificial intelligence (A.I.) tool to: (a) conduct the legal research referenced in the pleading; or (b) to draft a pleading or documents, must disclose to the Court that A.I. was used.'
What does the order require?
- 'Any person who submits a pleading or filing with the Court using any generative artificial intelligence (A.I.) tool to: (a) conduct the legal research referenced in the pleading; or (b) to draft a pleading or documents, must disclose to the Court that A.I. was used.'
- 'The A.I. disclosure shall identify the specific A.I. tool used and the manner in which it was used.'
- Reaffirms that 'Missouri Supreme Court Rule 55.03(c) continues to apply to all pleadings and filings, in that upon filed, documents and pleadings are deemed to be a representation and certification, by the person signing the filed document that the claim, defense, request, demand, objection, fact, contention or argument set forth in the document, is/are warranted by existing law, have evidentiary support, or, if so specifically identified, is/are likely to have evidentiary support, after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.'
- 'Parties should not assume that mere reliance on an A.I. tool will be presumed to constitute reasonable inquiry.'
- Trigger reaches both AI-assisted legal research and AI-assisted drafting; either alone is sufficient to require disclosure.
Practice areas: state civil, state criminal, state family, state probate
What the rule requires
Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County), Local Court Rules, Rule 3.3.1 (adopted July 25, 2024). The circuit adopted Local Rule 3.3.1 as part of Rule 3.3 (“Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence Use”). It remains in the circuit’s rules dated January 20, 2026. The rule has two operative pieces: a disclosure mandate triggered by AI use in either research or drafting, and a reaffirmation that Missouri Supreme Court Rule 55.03(c)‘s reasonable-inquiry duty cannot be discharged by relying on AI.
- Disclosure trigger. Any person submitting a pleading or filing using a generative AI tool to “(a) conduct the legal research referenced in the pleading; or (b) to draft a pleading or documents.” Either branch is independently sufficient. AI-assisted research that informed the brief, even if no AI text appears in the brief itself, triggers the rule.
- Disclosure content. The disclosure must “identify the specific A.I. tool used and the manner in which it was used.”
- Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 55.03(c) tie-in. Rule 3.3.1 reaffirms that the signing of a filing remains a representation that the claim, defense, fact, contention, or argument is warranted by existing law and has evidentiary support after reasonable inquiry.
- Express reasonable-inquiry warning. “Parties should not assume that mere reliance on an A.I. tool will be presumed to constitute reasonable inquiry.” This anticipates the argument that running a citation through an AI tool is itself the inquiry; the rule rejects that reading of Rule 55.03(c).
- Applies to “any person.” Attorneys, parties, and pro se litigants alike are subject to the rule.
- Sanctions. The rule does not enumerate sanctions of its own.
Context
Local Rule 3.3.1 was adopted about five months after Kruse v. Karlen, No. ED111172 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. Feb. 13, 2024), in which the Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal whose brief contained fictitious citations, finding that only two of its twenty-four case citations were genuine, and ordered the appellant to pay $10,000 in damages under Rule 84.19 for a frivolous appeal.
The 46th Judicial Circuit (Taney County) adopted the same text as its Local Rule 3.3, effective December 23, 2025. See the Missouri tracker page for other Missouri AI rules and orders.
Practitioner workflow
For 7th Circuit (Clay County) matters, the rule places the disclosure in the filing itself, naming the specific generative AI tool and describing how it was used. Because the rule reaches AI-assisted legal research as well as drafting, firms may wish to treat a research session with a generative AI tool as triggering the disclosure even where the filing was drafted by hand. Because the rule states that reliance on an AI tool is not presumed to be reasonable inquiry, firms may also wish to document an independent check of AI-assisted research against a primary source.
Scope
Clay County only (Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit). For federal filings in the Eastern District of Missouri, see the E.D. Mo. court-wide AI notice and the individual judges’ requirements. For other Missouri circuits, the circuit’s own local rules are the place to check before filing.
Primary source
7th Circuit Local Rules (PDF, see Rule 3.3.1 at internal page 9): http://www.circuit7.net/circuitcourt/Local-Court-Rules.pdf