Rhode Island's highest court on Wednesday amended its professional conduct rules and issued guidance on the use of generative AI, joining a growing number of states adopting AI guardrails for lawyers. The changes require lawyers to independently verify AI-generated work and impose new limits on how firms bill for AI-assisted tasks, directly affecting daily practice and ethical obligations.
New verification duties and billing restrictions
The amended conduct rule requires licensed lawyers to stay current on changes in the law "including the benefits and risks associated with existing and developing technology." The new guidance warns that AI tools can hallucinate legal citations or mischaracterize precedent, and states that lawyers must independently review and verify any AI-generated output. Courts nationwide have already sanctioned attorneys who failed to vet AI-assisted submissions.
On legal fees, the guidance is direct: attorneys may not bill clients for time saved through AI efficiencies. Routine AI costs should be treated like overhead-similar to rent, productivity software, and malpractice insurance. This clarity aims to prevent billing disputes as firms experiment with new technology.
Guidance extends to judges
The court's advisory guidelines also address judicial use of AI. The justices said the use of artificial intelligence technologies must not "undermine or replace their independent decision-making." The guidance does not ban AI outright but signals that any tool use should reinforce, not supplant, a judge's own analysis.
National trend toward AI accountability
Rhode Island's move follows similar actions in other states. The Florida Supreme Court in May said lawyers must certify that the cases they reference in filings "exist and are accurately cited." New York's new rule, effective June 1, requires attorneys to ensure filings contain "no fabricated or fictitious cases, statutes, or other material." These rules respond to a wave of incidents where AI-generated briefs included non-existent court decisions.
As AI tools become more common in legal workflows, many professionals are seeking structured guidance to meet evolving compliance demands. For those navigating these shifts, AI for Legal Professionals Courses can offer a practical way to build competence with the technology while staying within ethical bounds.
Why this matters for legal professionals
Rhode Island's new rules codify what many ethics opinions have already suggested: lawyers cannot blindly rely on AI output, and they cannot bill for time saved by automation. Ignoring these duties risks court sanctions and bar complaints. The advisory nature of the guidance means the court can update it as generative AI evolves, making compliance a moving target. Staying informed is now an explicit professional obligation, not an optional tech upgrade.
Your membership also unlocks:
