Regulation Tracker / United States (state)
Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County) Local Rule 3.3.1: Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence Use
Seventh Judicial Circuit of Missouri (Clay County) · Missouri
last revised 2024-07-01last verified 2026-09-041 versioncountry page →
Court ruleIn forceDisclosureCertification
map categories:Disclosure of AI use in filingsDuty to verify AI output
Unverified: we have not yet opened the official document at the linked address. The record is listed for completeness and excluded from search indexes until confirmed.
Missouri has no statewide AI filing rule, so several circuits have made their own. Clay County's Local Rule 3.3.1 requires disclosure of artificial intelligence use in filings from July 2024. Its operative wording was not read in this research run and must be confirmed.
- Applies to
- lawyers, litigants, parties
- Effective
- See version history
- Current version
- Local Rule 3.3.1 · 01 Jul 2024
- Last verified
- 04 Sept 2026
- Official text
- www.circuit7.net/circuitcourt/Local-Court-Rules.pdf
What the document requires
- Requires disclosure of artificial intelligence use in filings in the 7th Judicial Circuit (terms not yet verified)
- One of at least four Missouri circuits with local AI disclosure rules
- No statewide Missouri Supreme Court AI filing rule exists
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Local Rule 3.3.1current | 2024-07-01 | Adopted July 2024; the source gives a month only (adopted July 2024), so the day is recorded as the 1st | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Missouri 7th Judicial Circuit (Clay County) Local Rule 3.3.1: Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence Use" (Seventh Judicial Circuit of Missouri (Clay County), Local Rule 3.3.1, 2024-07-01), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-state/us-mo-clay-county-local-rule-3-3-1 (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.
More official documents in United States (state)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch, Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the Connecticut Legal System: Final Report · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- Connecticut Practice Book Section 4-9: Generative Artificial Intelligence Compliance · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- In re Amendments to Article V, Rule 1.1 of the Supreme Court Rules (Professional Conduct) and Adoption of Interim Generative AI Guidelines · RI Supreme Court
- Ohio Ethics Guide: Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers · Ohio Board of Professional Conduct
- 22 NYCRR Part 161 — Use of Artificial Intelligence Technology · NY Unified Court System
- In re Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515 (generative AI), SC2026-0673 · Florida Supreme Court