By: Jeffrey Backman, Esq., Roy Taub, Esq., and Jacob Mars, Esq.
California has enacted legislation establishing new statutory requirements for attorneys and arbitrators who use generative artificial intelligence in their work. Senate Bill 574 (“SB 574”), signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 30, 2026, is among the first state laws specifically addressing attorneys’ use of generative AI. The law is scheduled to take effect January 1, 2027.
SB 574 places particular emphasis on maintaining human responsibility for legal work performed with the assistance of AI. The legislation provides that an attorney may not “delegate the practice of law” to generative AI. Attorneys using AI must also take reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of AI-generated material and correct erroneous or “hallucinated” information before using it.
Further, the law establishes specific requirements for court filings. An attorney responsible for submitting a brief, pleading, motion, or other court paper must personally read and verify each citation appearing in the filing, including citations generated or supplied by an AI system. SB 574 also requires disclosure when generative AI is used to create documents submitted to a court. These provisions come amid increasing attention from courts nationwide to filings containing inaccurate or non-existent AI-generated authorities.
SB 574 also addresses confidentiality. Attorneys are restricted from entering confidential or other nonpublic information into generative AI systems in circumstances where the information would not be appropriately protected. The attorney must ensure that access to the entered confidential information on the AI system is restricted to the attorney and persons authorized by the attorney who are subject to obligations to protect the confidentiality of the information.
The legislation further provides that arbitrators may not delegate any portion of their decision-making process to a generative AI tool. The legislation largely builds upon professional responsibilities that already apply to attorneys, including duties relating to competence, confidentiality, supervision, and candor to the tribunal. California’s State Bar has separately been developing proposed amendments to its Rules of Professional Conduct addressing AI use, including verification of AI-generated authorities and appropriate supervision of AI-assisted legal work.
The practical significance of SB 574 may therefore lie less in prohibiting lawyers from using AI and more in establishing that AI-assisted legal work remains subject to attorney oversight and accountability. As AI tools become increasingly integrated into legal research, drafting, and other tasks, California’s new law provides a statutory framework emphasizing that technological assistance does not replace the attorney’s responsibility for the resulting work.
This publication is provided by Greenspoon Marder LLP is issued for informational purposes only and is not intended to be construed or used as general legal advice nor a solicitation of any type. Please contact the author(s) or your Greenspoon Marder LLP contact if you have any questions regarding the currency of this information. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision. Before you decide, ask for written information about the lawyer’s legal qualifications and experience.
