Regulation Tracker / United States (state)
Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200: Ethical Issues Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence
Pennsylvania Bar Association Committee on Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility and Philadelphia Bar Association Professional Guidance Committee · Pennsylvania
last revised 2024-05-22last verified 2026-09-041 versioncountry page →
country page →Ethics opinionIn forceCompetenceVerification dutyConfidentialityClient consentSupervision
map categories:Bar guidance on generative AIDuty to verify AI outputClient data in AI toolsBilling for AI workTechnological competenceClient consent and transparency
A joint opinion of the Pennsylvania and Philadelphia bar ethics committees concluding that, with appropriate safeguards, lawyers may use AI consistently with the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct. It sets out twelve best practices spanning truthfulness, citation verification, competence, confidentiality, conflicts, client communication, bias, misuse, billing, professional judgment and transparency.
- Applies to
- lawyers, firms
- Effective
- See version history
- Current version
- Original · 22 May 2024
- Last verified
- 04 Sept 2026
What the document requires
- With appropriate safeguards, lawyers may use AI in accordance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct
- Lawyers must be competent in the use of AI technologies and must verify that citations accurately reflect the content referenced
- Lawyers must safeguard client information and ensure AI systems handling it adhere to strict confidentiality measures
- Lawyers must communicate with clients about their AI use and, if necessary, obtain consent before using certain AI tools
- AI-related expenses must be reasonable and appropriately disclosed to clients
- Lawyers should be transparent with clients, colleagues and the courts about AI use, including its limitations and uncertainties
- AI does not replace personal review of cases, statutes and other legislative materials
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Originalcurrent | 2024-05-22 | Initial publication | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200: Ethical Issues Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence" (Pennsylvania Bar Association Committee on Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility and Philadelphia Bar Association Professional Guidance Committee, Original, 2024-05-22), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-state/us-pa-joint-formal-opinion-2024-200 (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.
More official documents in United States (state)
- California SB 574 (Chapter 858, Statutes of 2026): generative AI duties for attorneys and arbitrators · California Legislature
- Standing Order – Jury Trials · Circuit Court of Cook County, Law Division, Trial Section (Judge Cleary)
- Standing Order for Courtroom 2309 · Circuit Court of Cook County, Law Division, Trial Section (Judge Golden)
- Standing Order, General Chancery Calendar 9 · Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division (Judge Horan)
- Amended and Restated Standing Order, Calendar 60 · Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division, Mortgage Foreclosure/Mechanics Lien Section (Judge Seaton)
- Amended and Restated Standing Order, Calendar 60 · Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division, Mortgage Foreclosure/Mechanics Lien Section (Judge Sullivan)