Are Local Counsel’s Obligations Increasing Because of AI-Assisted Research? A Look at Pro Hac Vice Practice
We get calls all the time from out-of-state attorneys who need local counsel here in Connecticut. Usually the questions are the same: How involved do we need to be? What are we actually going to do? Lately, there’s a new wrinkle to that conversation. Generative AI has entered the picture, and while the rules really have not changed, local counsel cannot be complacent.
What is a Local Counsel?
Local counsel is an attorney admitted in the state or federal court where a case is pending, who sponsors an attorney who is not admitted to practice in that state or court, so they can be admitted pro hac vice for a single case. Pro hac vice is a Latin phrase meaning “for this occasion.” While the local counsel may not do the substantive work, they still have obligations to the court and to the client. The latter can and should be identified in the engagement agreement with the client. Back in the day, local counsel served mostly as, what lawyers called, a mailbox. For example, a Connecticut lawyer has a law school friend who practices in Texas but not Connecticut. They have a client whom they want to represent in Connecticut. You would act as local counsel and simply accept documents to file, and file them. Not really do much more, but since you knew and trusted your friend would “behave” and his work product was good, there was not much more to do.
Cautionary tales abound.
Every day we see cases where courts are sanctioning lawyers based on their use of AI. I could run through different cases here, but this site has most if not all of them indexed.
Connecticut’s response.
As of June 23, 2026, Connecticut’s Practice Book includes a new rule, Section 4-9, “Generative Artificial Intelligence Compliance.” It requires anyone using generative AI in a court filing to independently verify every citation, quote, and piece of evidence the tool produced. Fail to do so, and the rule warns of court-imposed sanctions. Courts can even enter a nonsuit or default judgment, a significantly higher stake than a $2,000 fine.
The rule doesn’t stop at creating a standalone obligation. Connecticut amended Section 4-2, the existing rule governing signatures on pleadings, at the same time. Now, signing a filing in Connecticut also certifies that you’ve complied with the AI rule. The requirement lives inside the same signature attorneys have always had to provide, rather than as some separate certificate lawyers might overlook.
In fact, Connecticut’s Supreme Court just last month addressed AI hallucinations in appellate filings. The lawyer owned up to it, regretted it and got off with additional CLE courses. You can read that opinion here.
So, does this increase local counsel’s obligations specifically in pro hac vice matters?
Connecticut’s rule itself doesn’t reference pro hac vice counsel. And it doesn’t need to. It applies to anyone filing in a Connecticut court, full stop. But I think the practical answer is yes, for reasons specific to how pro hac vice cases actually work. It doesn’t increase local counsel’s obligations, but local counsel have to pay more attention than they might have in the past.
Local counsel in Connecticut has always had to review, sign and stand behind pleadings they file. Historically, that review centered on procedure: deadlines, local formatting requirements, court-specific quirks an out-of-state attorney might not know. Review now needs to reach further because of the rampant use of AI and potential sanctions.
That matters more, not less, in the pro hac vice context. Out-of-state lead attorneys often juggle multiple jurisdictions’ rules and deadlines under real time pressure. That pressure makes leaning on an AI tool for a quick draft tempting. It also makes a busy supervising attorney less likely to think to ask whether that happened. And larger firms, those that often seek pro hac vice admission, may have less experienced associates doing the drafting who may use AI. Back in the day, local counsel would simply sign the pleading or brief and file it. Trusting the research, citations etc. done by the pro hac admitted attorney.
No more. If you have not taken your local counsel obligations seriously in the past, you better start now.
Local Counsel have and will continue to be sanctioned
We have found several cases where local counsel has been sanctioned for pro hac counsel’s use of AI, because local counsel abdicated their responsibilities when signing pleadings.
Mattox v. Product Innovations Research, LLC (E.D. Okla.) — local counsel Gary Buckles never reviewed the pleadings, treated the role as “a favor,” and got a public reprimand plus a 12-month ban on sponsoring pro hac vice attorneys in the district.
Schramm v. Mayrack (D. Del.) — the court flagged local counsel’s failure to police an AI-tainted brief and deadlines, ordering show-cause briefing rather than a final sanction. Docket does not show a final sanction and the case is on appeal on a summary judgment ruling.
Lifetime Well LLC v. IBSpot.com Inc. (E.D. Pa.) — local counsel Jeffrey Goldin signed a motion drafted by out-of-state counsel’s AI-using law clerk without checking it; sanctioned with a non-monetary “public lesson” letter to the local IP bar association (“local counsel is not a rubber stamp”). The Court was troubled by “his near-blind acceptance of papers drafted
by an attorney not admitted to the Bar of this Court.”
Wadsworth v. Walmart Inc. (D. Wyo.) — local counsel Taly Goody never saw the AI-hallucinated motions before filing under her sponsorship; fined $1,000 for breaching her “nondelegable duty.”
Versant Funding LLC v. Teras Breakbulk Ocean Navigation Enterprises, LLC (S.D. Fla.) — local counsel Joel Bello signed a brief with one fabricated case sent to him by pro hac vice counsel; fined $500, jointly liable for opposing fees, and ordered into an AI ethics CLE.
What I’d suggest local counsel do differently now:
Ask directly whether AI was used in the drafting. Don’t treat it as an accusation. Just ask it as a routine question, the same way you’d ask who handled the underlying legal research on a brief before you sign it.
Cite-check the filings, the quotations, the propositions, not just the formatting. Spend the time (compensated of course) pulling up cited cases, especially anything unfamiliar or oddly specific. That’s far cheaper than a sanctions hearing down the road.
Build it into the engagement letter. Some local counsel now address this upfront, in the agreement that sets up the relationship with lead counsel, rather than discovering mid-case whether an AI tool touched a filing. A short clause confirming that any AI-assisted drafting will be disclosed and independently verified before it reaches local counsel costs nothing to include. It can also head off an awkward conversation later.
Remember the liability question is separate from what a court might do. A judicial sanction is one risk. A malpractice claim is another, and it doesn’t require a judge to catch anything first. If a filing goes out with an error tracing back to unverified AI-generated content, and it damages the client’s position, local counsel’s signature sits right there on the document.
The bigger picture. Local counsel’s core obligation hasn’t changed on paper. What’s changed is what that signature now has to represent, and Smith v. Farwell shows exactly what happens when it doesn’t hold up in practice. This matters especially in pro hac vice matters. The entire purpose of the local counsel relationship is to catch what an out-of-state attorney might miss, and this is one more item worth catching before it becomes a problem in front of a judge.
Let’s Talk.
If you’re an out-of-state attorney bringing a case to Connecticut, or the Connecticut attorney signing off on someone else’s filing, this is worth a real conversation before anything gets filed. Whether you’re weighing how much oversight a matter needs, or you just want a second set of eyes that knows Connecticut’s courts and its new rules inside and out, I’m happy to talk it through with you.
Learn more about Tony and the Minchella Law team!
Explore our practice areas.
Contact us today.
