Wisconsin

none

Summary

Wisconsin has issued no formal ethics opinion on AI and no binding judicial or administrative AI policy. Two concrete Wisconsin events deserve attention: Kenosha County Circuit Court sanctioned the district attorney in February 2026 for undisclosed AI use with hallucinated citations, leading to dismissal of 74 criminal charges; and the Waukesha County Circuit Court Family Division has a standing order requiring disclosure, independent review, and perjury-certified citation verification.

Applicable ABA Model Rules

Rule 1.1
Rule 1.3
Rule 1.4
Rule 1.6
Rule 2.1
Rule 3.1
Rule 3.3
Rule 5.1
Rule 5.3
Rule 8.4

Carrier Implications

Wisconsin does not require malpractice insurance. WILMIC is a primary in-state carrier. No Wisconsin-specific AI exclusions identified, but the ABA Journal and ALPS warn that AI-related claims may not be explicitly covered. The Kenosha incident illustrates downstream case-dismissal consequences.

This summary is informational only. Verify the primary source before relying on this entry. Bar rules differ meaningfully by state. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

The State Bar of Wisconsin Professional Ethics Committee has issued no formal ethics opinion specifically addressing AI as of 2026-04-23. The Bar has instead addressed AI through Wisconsin Lawyer articles, CLE sessions, and informal Ethics Counsel guidance, all mapping existing SCR Chapter 20 rules onto AI use. Wisconsin Formal Ethics Opinions EF-15-01 (cloud computing) and EF-17-02 (client confidentiality) are the foundational technology-confidentiality opinions; general engagement letter boilerplate is not sufficient as informed consent for AI use.

Two concrete Wisconsin events deserve attention. First, Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge David Hughes sanctioned District Attorney Xavier Solis in February 2026 for an undisclosed AI-assisted filing containing hallucinated and false citations; the entire response was struck and 74 criminal charges in a burglary case were dismissed. Second, the Waukesha County Circuit Court Family Division has a binding standing order requiring AI use disclosure, independent attorney review, and a certification under penalty of perjury that every cited case, statute, or record has been verified. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has issued no AI-specific order; no federal district standing orders for E.D. or W.D. Wis. have been identified.

Bottom line for a 5-50 attorney Wisconsin firm: There is no Wisconsin formal opinion to cite and no statewide court mandate to comply with. The exposure is entirely under existing rules and it is real. A firm practicing before Waukesha County Family Division must comply with that court’s standing order. All Wisconsin firms should have a written AI policy, a citation verification protocol, and a confidentiality review of any AI tool before inputting client data.

Last verified: April 24, 2026