SB 574

Existing law, the State Bar Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation. The act requires an attorney to strictly maintain client confidences and to preserve client secrets at their own peril. This bill would prohibit an attorney from delegating the practice of law to generative artificial intelligence. The bill would require an attorney who uses generative artificial intelligence to assist in the practice of law to, among other things, not enter confidential, personal identifying, or other nonpublic information into a public artificial intelligence system, as specified. The bill would also require an attorney to take reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of generative artificial intelligence outputs and to correct any erroneous or hallucinated output in any material used by the attorney. Existing law requires every pleading, petition, written notice of motion, or other similar paper to be signed by the attorney of record, or if a party is unrepresented, by the party, thereby certifying to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief that it is not being presented primarily for an improper purpose and that the claims, defenses, and legal and factual contentions are warranted, as specified. This bill would prohibit a brief, pleading, motion, or any other paper filed in any court from containing any citations that the attorney responsible for submitting the pleading has not personally read and verified, including any citation provided by generative artificial intelligence. Existing law, the California Arbitration Act, provides a statutory framework for the enforcement of contractual arbitration under California law. The act establishes that a written agreement to submit a present or future controversy to arbitration is valid, enforceable, and irrevocable, except as specified. The act defines a neutral arbitrator as one who is selected jointly by the parties or by the parties’ arbitrators, or is appointed by the court if the parties or their arbitrators cannot jointly select an arbitrator. The act requires a person selected to serve as a neutral arbitrator to disclose all matters that could cause a person aware of the facts to reasonably entertain a doubt as to the proposed neutral arbitrator’s impartiality. This bill would prohibit an arbitrator from delegating any part of their decisionmaking process to any generative artificial intelligence tool. The bill would prohibit an arbitrator from relying on information generated by generative artificial intelligence outside the record without making appropriate disclosures to the parties beforehand. The bill would require an arbitrator to assume responsibility for all aspects of an award, regardless of any use of generative artificial intelligence tools to assist with the decisionmaking process. The California Constitution establishes the Judicial Council, and requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules for court administration, practice, and procedure, and to undertake certain responsibilities with regard to court facilities. This bill would require the Judicial Council to publicly revisit a specified standard of judicial administration to incorporate any necessary changes reflecting the further development of generative artificial intelligence. Existing law requires the State Bar to create a program to certify alternative resolution firms, providers, or practitioners. Existing law requires the program to include procedures to verify, among other things, that a firm, provider, or practitioner has procedures in place for persons to make complaints regarding the failure of an arbitrator or mediator of the firm, provider, or practitioner to comply with ethical standards, as applicable, and procedures to remedy failures of arbitrators or mediators to comply with those standards. This bill would instead require the State Bar to adopt procedures for the State Bar or a professional organization to receive, investigate, and resolve any complaints that a certified firm, provider, or practitioner failed to comply with the applicable ethical standards of conduct, as specified. The bill would require complaint proceedings to occur in private and be confidential. After a decision on a complaint, the bill would authorize the State Bar to publicly disclose information or records concerning complaint proceedings that do not reveal confidential or privileged communications. The bill would exempt information, records, or communications provided under these provisions from disclosure under the Public Records Act. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.