Wyoming

none

Summary

Wyoming has no formal bar ethics opinion, no AI task force, and no statewide AI standing order. Bar Counsel Mark Gifford has written two non-binding educational articles. The U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming issued General Order 2025-01 reminding litigants of FRCP 11 obligations, and in Wadsworth v. Walmart (Feb 2025) sanctioned three Morgan & Morgan attorneys, revoking one attorney's pro hac vice admission and fining all three after they filed motions citing eight non-existent AI-generated cases.

Applicable ABA Model Rules

Rule 1.1
Rule 1.3
Rule 1.4
Rule 1.5
Rule 1.6
Rule 3.3
Rule 5.1
Rule 5.3

Carrier Implications

Wyoming does not require malpractice insurance. ALPS is the bar-endorsed carrier and has published national guidance on AI coverage gaps including UPL exclusions for AI-driven legal judgments without attorney oversight. No Wyoming-specific AI endorsements or exclusions identified.

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.

Wyoming is among the lightest-touch jurisdictions for formal AI ethics guidance directed at attorneys. The Wyoming State Bar has issued no formal ethics opinion on AI and has no publicly announced AI task force or rulemaking proceeding. Bar Counsel Mark Gifford has written two educational articles in the Wyoming Lawyer bar journal (February 2024 and April 2025) articulating duties under existing WRPCs, but those articles carry no advisory or binding authority.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming issued General Order 2025-01 (May 13, 2025), which does not mandate disclosure but reminds all litigants of Rule 11 obligations and warns about AI-generated hallucinations. In Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc., 348 F.R.D. 489 (D. Wyo. 2025), Judge Kelly H. Rankin sanctioned three Morgan & Morgan attorneys after they filed motions citing eight non-existent AI-generated cases (Ayala $3,000 fine and pro hac vice revoked; Morgan and Goody each $1,000). The court held that “a fake opinion is not ‘existing law’” and that signing a document creates a nondelegable personal duty to verify cited law. Wyoming HB 0102 (effective 2026-07-01) addresses deepfakes, child exploitation, and developer liability but does not regulate attorney conduct.

Bottom line for a 5-50 attorney Wyoming firm: No formal bar opinion, no mandatory disclosure rule, and no statewide court AI order govern AI use in Wyoming practice today. The absence of guidance is not a safe harbor. The Wadsworth sanctions case is a concrete reminder that filing unverified AI-generated citations violates existing professional rules in Wyoming federal court and can result in revocation of pro hac vice status and monetary sanctions.

Last verified: April 23, 2026