Texas (statewide): Texas Supreme Court Misc. Docket No. 26-9054: Preliminary Approval of…
Supreme Court of Texas (Chief Justice James D. Blacklock and the Justices) · Supreme Court of Texas
Verified October 1, 2026
- Citation
- Texas Supreme Court Misc. Docket No. 26-9054: Preliminary Approval of Amendments to Tex. R. Civ. P. 13 and Tex. R. App. P. 9 and 52
- Order date
- June 26, 2026
Status and prospective requirement
Not yet in force (Proposed, not in force (comments closed Sep 1, 2026)). If adopted as proposed it would require: Proposed Tex. R. Civ. P. 13(c)(1): 'By signing a court filing, the signer represents to the court that: (1) the signer reviewed the filing and verified its accuracy, including that the legal citations, quotations, and holdings are not fabricated.'
What the proposal would require
- Proposed Tex. R. Civ. P. 13(c)(1): 'By signing a court filing, the signer represents to the court that: (1) the signer reviewed the filing and verified its accuracy, including that the legal citations, quotations, and holdings are not fabricated.'
- Proposed Tex. R. App. P. 9.1(d)(1) carries the same representation for appellate filings and adds record citations: the signer 'reviewed the filing and verified its accuracy, including that the legal citations, quotations, holdings, and record citations are not fabricated.'
- The proposed comment states that Rule 13(c)(1) 'is adopted principally to address concerns about the improper use of artificial intelligence in filings' and that 'verifying a filing for accuracy is important, regardless of whether artificial intelligence was used.'
- Proposed Rule 13(e)(2): available sanctions 'may include reprimand, contempt, striking of the filing in whole or in part, dismissal of proceedings, costs, or attorney's fees', must be proportionate, and require notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond.
- No disclosure of AI use: the representation applies to every filing whether or not AI was used.
- The order invited comments by September 1, 2026, states that the Court 'may change the amendments in response to public comments', and 'expects the amendments to take effect on October 1, 2026.' Rule 57 would be repealed and its signature requirements folded into Rule 13.
Practice areas: state civil, state appellate
What the proposal would do
On June 26, 2026 the Supreme Court of Texas, in Misc. Docket No. 26-9054, preliminarily approved a rewrite of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 13, with conforming changes to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9 and 52 and the repeal of Rule 57. The centerpiece is a new representation made by signing a court filing in a civil case:
“(c) Representations by Signer. By signing a court filing, the signer represents to the court that: (1) the signer reviewed the filing and verified its accuracy, including that the legal citations, quotations, and holdings are not fabricated; and (2) to the best of the signer’s knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry the filing is not groundless, brought in bad faith, or brought for the purpose of harassment.”
Proposed TRAP 9.1(d) makes the same representation for appellate filings and adds “record citations” to the list of things the signer verified are not fabricated.
Why it is on an AI tracker
The rule text does not mention AI. The proposed comment explains the purpose: paragraph (c)(1) “is adopted principally to address concerns about the improper use of artificial intelligence in filings, which increases the risk of fabricated authorities, quotations, and holdings appearing in court filings. Verifying a filing for accuracy is important, regardless of whether artificial intelligence was used.” It also states the rule “is not intended to govern disputes regarding the interpretation, application, or persuasive force of existing authorities.”
Sanctions
Proposed Rule 13(e) requires notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond before any sanction. Available sanctions “may include reprimand, contempt, striking of the filing in whole or in part, dismissal of proceedings, costs, or attorney’s fees,” must be “proportionate to the violation found,” and lesser sanctions must come first before contempt, striking, or dismissal unless the court explains why they would be insufficient. Any sanction must be set out in a written order stating the reasons.
Status
This is a preliminary approval, not a rule in force. Comments were due September 1, 2026, and the Court said it “expects the amendments to take effect on October 1, 2026” but “may change the amendments in response to public comments.” As of September 28, 2026 the Court’s administrative orders index shows no final approval order. The Texas Business Court’s Local Rule 10(c) is tracked separately; this proposal would reach civil filings in Texas trial courts through Rule 13 and appellate filings through Rule 9.1.
Primary source
Misc. Docket No. 26-9054, Preliminary Approval (June 26, 2026) (PDF)
How this order changed
Dated record of this order's own lifecycle. Where it was amended or withdrawn, the badge shows its standing after that step.
- proposedThe Supreme Court of Texas preliminarily approved amendments to Tex. R. Civ. P. 13 and Tex. R. App. P. 9 and 52 and the repeal of Rule 57, inviting comments by September 1, 2026. source