N.Y. Surr. Ct. (Saratoga Cnty.): Local Court Rules of the Honorable Jonathan G. Schopf, S…

What the rule requires

Rule 2.7 of the Local Court Rules of the Honorable Jonathan G. Schopf, Surrogate (Saratoga County Surrogate’s Court / County Court, effective January 1, 2025) is headed “Use of Artificial Intellegence (A.I.)” [sic]. Its stated purpose is “to govern the use of artificial intelligence (A.I.) technologies by attorneys and/or parties in the preparation and submission of materials to the Court” and “to ensure the ethical use of A.I. and maintain the integrity of evidence.”

The rule defines artificial intelligence broadly, as “Any technology that uses machine learning, natural language processing, or any other computational mechanism to simulate human intelligence, including document generation, evidence creation or analysis, and legal research.”

Disclosure for evidence

“Attorneys, witnesses, and/or parties must disclose the use of A.I.-assisted technology, whether generative or A.I. assisted, in the creation or editing of any document or material submitted as evidence to the court.” The disclosure “should include a general description of the type of A.I. technology used, such as identifying the operating software or program and its role in the preparation of the materials,” and “must be made at the time of submission through a written certification attached to or submitted with the evidence.”

Responsibility for everything else

For other submissions, the rule places responsibility on the filer: “Attorneys, witnesses, and/or parties remain ultimately responsible for the accuracy, relevance, and appropriateness of all other A.I.-generated and/ or A.I.-assisted materials submitted to the court including but not limited to legal memorandum, affidavits and briefs,” and “must thoroughly review all A.I.-assisted materials to ensure they meet all legal and ethical standards.”

Reporting, sanctions, and Frye hearings

“All parties and their counsel have a duty to immediately inform the Court if they discover the use of A.I. in any document filed in their case which was not properly disclosed under this rule.” Violations may bring sanctions “including, inter alia, striking the document from the record, the imposition of economic sanctions or contempt, and/ or dismissal of the lawsuit/petition/claim.”

For AI-assisted or AI-generated evidence, “the opposing party shall have the right to request an evidentiary ‘Frye’ hearing as to the reliability and admissibility of the A.I. assisted or generated evidence prior to the hearing or trial in which the evidence is proposed to be introduced.” Few AI rules address the admissibility of AI-generated evidence directly.

Primary source

Local Court Rules of the Honorable Jonathan G. Schopf, Surrogate, effective January 1, 2025 (PDF)