Pennsylvania

formal

PBA/Philadelphia Bar Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200 (May 22, 2024)

Summary

Pennsylvania has a joint formal advisory opinion (Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, May 2024), a binding Pennsylvania Supreme Court Interim Policy governing judicial AI use (effective December 2025), and an active enforcement record including a Commonwealth Court brief-striking opinion (December 2025). Pennsylvania has more documented AI hallucination enforcement incidents than nearly any other state, with at least 13 cases in 2025.

Applicable ABA Model Rules

Rule 1.1
Rule 1.4
Rule 1.5
Rule 1.6
Rule 1.7
Rule 3.1
Rule 3.3
Rule 5.1
Rule 5.3
Rule 5.5
Rule 8.4

Carrier Implications

Pennsylvania Insurance Department Notice 2024-04 requires insurers to develop written AI governance programs and conduct vendor due diligence. Malpractice carriers are subject to this notice and may begin asking insureds about AI use policies at renewal, creating the most direct carrier-renewal connection in PA's AI regulatory landscape.

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.

Pennsylvania’s Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200, issued by the PBA Committee on Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility together with the Philadelphia Bar Association Professional Guidance Committee, requires AI competence (RPC 1.1 and Comment 8), independent verification of all AI-generated citations against primary sources, vetting of confidentiality and training/retention practices before inputting client information (RPC 1.6), client communication and informed consent when AI materially affects representation (RPC 1.4), reasonable AI-related billing (RPC 1.5), and supervision (RPCs 5.1, 5.3). The opinion is advisory; it does not bind the Disciplinary Board or any court.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted an Interim Policy on AI Use by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel effective December 8, 2025, prohibiting non-public case information from being shared with non-secured AI systems, plus General Ethics Guidance No. 2-2025 (December 15, 2025) reinforcing that GenAI does not change confidentiality or candor obligations. Commonwealth Court struck a brief in No. 1172 C.D. 2025 (December 5, 2025) for unverified AI-generated content. Spotlight PA documented at least 13 Pennsylvania AI hallucination cases in 2025, including the ongoing South Side Area School District v. PA HRC matter and Saber v. Navy Federal Credit Union (Pa. Super. Oct. 28, 2025). Judge Michael Baylson (E.D. Pa.) has an individual standing order; no E.D. Pa. district-wide AI rule exists. Pennsylvania Insurance Department Notice 2024-04 requires insurers to develop AI governance programs, vendor due diligence, and consumer notification.

Bottom line for a 5-50 attorney Pennsylvania firm: Joint Formal Opinion 2024-200 is the governing standard. Pennsylvania has more documented AI hallucination enforcement incidents than nearly any other state. The Pennsylvania Insurance Department issued carrier AI governance guidance, creating a direct carrier-renewal nexus.

Last verified: April 24, 2026