Virginia

formal

Virginia State Bar LEO 1901 (approved by Supreme Court of Virginia, Nov 24, 2025)

Summary

Virginia has informal VSB guidance (Aug 2024) plus binding Legal Ethics Opinion 1901 on fees, approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia in November 2025. LEO 1901 expressly departs from ABA Formal Opinion 512 and North Carolina 2024 FEO 1: value-based fees are permissible even when AI dramatically reduces time, and attorneys are not required to reduce flat fees solely because AI was used. The verification duty is restated alongside this billing flexibility.

Applicable ABA Model Rules

Rule 1.1
Rule 1.4
Rule 1.5
Rule 1.6
Rule 3.3
Rule 5.1
Rule 5.3

Carrier Implications

LEO 1901 creates no malpractice safe harbor for AI errors; the verification duty is affirmatively restated. Value-based billing with AI is permissible, but attorneys retain full responsibility for output quality. E.D. Va. judges issue case-specific AI orders requiring per-case checks.

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.

Virginia has informal Virginia State Bar guidance (August 2024) on the Ethics and Conduct page, plus a binding formal Legal Ethics Opinion 1901, approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia on November 24, 2025. LEO 1901 holds that Rule 1.5 permits non-hourly fee structures accounting for skill, judgment, experience, and results obtained, even when AI dramatically reduced time. A lawyer is not ethically required to reduce a flat or value-based fee solely because AI accelerated the work. This position directly rejects the implication in ABA Formal Opinion 512 and North Carolina 2024 FEO 1 that efficiency-driven time savings require fee reductions, making Virginia notably more permissive on AI-enhanced billing than most states.

The verification obligation is explicitly restated alongside the billing flexibility: “If counsel relies on artificial intelligence or other technology to draft a filing, the attorney is still responsible for ensuring the filing is accurate and does not contain fabricated caselaw or quotations.” The VBA Model AI Policy (May 2024) is the most structurally complete compliance template available. No mandatory court disclosure rule exists at the state level; individual E.D. Va. federal judges (Young, Lauck, Novak, Vaala, Payne, Brinkema) have issued case-specific AI orders. HB 1642 (Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-11.14, effective July 1 2025) requires human decision-makers for AI-influenced criminal justice decisions.

Bottom line for a 5-50 attorney Virginia firm: LEO 1901 is important nationally because it permits AI-enhanced billing unlike most other state bar guidance. But the verification obligation is explicitly restated alongside it, and the E.D. Va. patchwork of individual judge AI orders requires a per-case check before filing.

Last verified: April 24, 2026