MT 13th Judicial District (Yellowstone County): Montana 13th Judicial District Court (Yel…

What the rule requires

Rule 35 first appears in the Yellowstone County Local Rules dated February 28, 2025 (in force April 1, 2025, signed by Chief Judge Donald Harris). Chief Judge Thomas Pardy re-adopted it without change in the current Local Rules, in force January 1, 2026. Rule 35 governs generative AI use in any filed document.

The verbatim rule text is short and absolute:

If an attorney for a party or a self-represented party has used generative Artificial Intelligence (hereafter “AI”) in the preparation of any document filed with the 13th Judicial District Court, they MUST, identify the type of AI used and CERTIFY every citation to the law or record in the filing has been verified as accurate.

1. Trigger. Any use of generative AI in the preparation of any document filed with the 13th Judicial District Court.
2. Required disclosure. Identification of the type of AI used. The rule does not require a separately labeled disclosure block, but the type of AI must appear in the filing.
3. Required certification. Every citation to law or to the record has been verified as accurate. The certification reaches both legal authority and record citations, which is broader than rules that focus only on case citations.
4. Applies to both attorneys and self-represented parties. Both populations bear the disclosure-and-certification duty.
5. No stated consequence. Rule 35 itself states no sanction or other consequence for noncompliance.

Context

The 13th Judicial District covers Yellowstone County (Billings), Montana’s largest urban court. Together with the 4th Judicial District (Missoula) Local Rule 3(G), Rule 35 is one of three Montana district-level rules (with the 4th and 15th Judicial Districts) that make AI disclosure a binding local-rule obligation. The Montana Supreme Court has not adopted a statewide AI rule, and the State Bar of Montana has not issued a formal ethics opinion on AI use as of April 2026.

The 13th District version of the disclosure rule is more compact than Missoula’s. Where 4th District Rule 3(G) adds an absence-of-AI presumption (a filing without certification is presumed to have been prepared without AI) and a definition of “generative artificial intelligence,” 13th District Rule 35 simply imposes the disclose-and-certify duty.

Practitioner workflow

For 13th Judicial District matters, the disclosure should appear on the face of any filing prepared with generative AI: name the tool, certify that every citation to law and to the record has been verified. Firms practicing in both Billings and Missoula may wish to use a single AI-disclosure block that satisfies both rules: the 4th District format (named tool, manner of use, scope of certification) plus Rule 35’s certification that every citation to law or to the record in the whole filing has been verified.

Scope

13th Judicial District only (Yellowstone County, Billings). For Missoula matters, see 4th Judicial District Local Rule 3(G). For federal matters in Montana, the District of Montana has not adopted a court-wide AI standing order; Judge Donald W. Molloy’s pro hac vice admission orders prohibit admitted out-of-state counsel from using generative AI drafting programs.

Primary source

Yellowstone County Local Rules (PDF, see Rule 35 at internal page 22): https://www.yellowstonecountymt.gov/clerk_court/LocalRules.pdf