Michigan AI Ethics Rules for Attorneys

Michigan attorneys must navigate artificial intelligence integration within the framework of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC). While the State Bar of Michigan has not yet issued comprehensive AI-specific guidance, the existing ethical rules provide clear direction for responsible AI use. Michigan’s diverse legal community, from Detroit’s corporate law firms to solo practitioners across the Upper Peninsula, requires practical guidance on emerging technologies.

State Bar of Michigan Overview

#

Regulatory Authority

#

The State Bar of Michigan (SBM) regulates the practice of law in Michigan under the authority of the Michigan Supreme Court. The SBM provides ethics guidance, administers discipline, and supports the professional development of Michigan attorneys.

Contact Information:

• Address: Michael Franck Building, 306 Townsend Street, Lansing, MI 48933
• Phone: (517) 346-6300
• Website: michbar.org

Ethics Resources

#

The State Bar of Michigan provides ethics guidance through:

• Ethics Opinions: Published opinions interpreting the MRPC
• Ethics Helpline: (888) 558-4760 for informal ethics guidance
• Professional Responsibility Section: CLE programs and resources on ethics issues

Current AI Guidance Status

#

Michigan attorneys should monitor SBM publications and the State Bar Journal for emerging guidance on AI ethics. The SBM’s Professional Ethics Committee regularly addresses new technologies and their ethical implications.

Core Ethical Obligations for AI Use

#

MRPC 1.1: Competence

#

Michigan Rule 1.1 states that “a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client,” requiring “the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.”

Competence in the AI Context:

The duty of competence in Michigan extends to technology use. Comment [8] to the Model Rules (which Michigan follows) notes that lawyers must “keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.”

AI Competence Requirements:

1. Technical Understanding: Attorneys must understand how AI tools work, including their limitations and potential for errors
2. Output Verification: All AI-generated content must be independently verified before reliance
3. Hallucination Awareness: Understanding that generative AI can fabricate citations, cases, and legal propositions is essential
4. Appropriate Use Cases: Recognizing when AI is and isn’t appropriate for specific legal tasks

Verification Protocol:

• Check all case citations in Westlaw, Lexis, or official Michigan reporters
• Verify quoted language against original sources
• Use Shepard’s or KeyCite to confirm authority remains valid
• Review AI-generated analysis against established Michigan law
• Cross-reference conclusions with authoritative treatises

MRPC 1.6: Confidentiality of Information

#

Michigan Rule 1.6(a) provides that “a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent.”

AI and Confidentiality Concerns:

When attorneys input information into AI systems, critical confidentiality questions arise:

1. Data Transmission: Information entered into cloud-based AI is transmitted to third-party servers
2. Storage and Retention: AI platforms may retain inputted information indefinitely
3. Training Data Use: Some AI systems use inputs to improve their models
4. Third-Party Access: Platform employees or contractors may access stored data
5. Security Vulnerabilities: Cloud systems face cybersecurity risks

Confidentiality Compliance Steps:

• Review Platform Policies: Carefully examine Terms of Service and Privacy Policies
• Enterprise Solutions: Consider professional/enterprise AI versions with enhanced privacy
• Data Minimization: Input only information necessary for the task
• Anonymization: Remove client-identifying information when possible
• Client Consent: Obtain informed consent before inputting sensitive information
• Local Processing: Consider AI tools that process data locally

MRPC 1.3: Diligence

#

Michigan Rule 1.3 requires a lawyer to “act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.”

AI and Diligent Representation:

• AI tools should enhance attorney diligence, not create shortcuts that compromise thoroughness
• Verification of AI outputs is part of diligent representation
• Technical failures or AI errors do not excuse missed deadlines
• AI efficiency gains should benefit clients through better, faster service, not superficial work

MRPC 1.4: Communication

#

Michigan Rule 1.4 requires lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed and explain matters sufficiently for informed decision-making.

AI Disclosure Obligations:

While Michigan has not mandated AI disclosure, communication may be required when:

• AI use materially affects the representation strategy or outcome
• Confidential information will be processed by AI systems
• AI use impacts fees or billing arrangements
• Clients specifically inquire about technology use
• Informed consent is needed for AI-related decisions

Recommended Approach: Address AI use policies in engagement letters and discuss during initial consultations.

MRPC 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal

#

Michigan Rule 3.3(a)(1) prohibits lawyers from making “a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal.”

Court Filing Verification:

Before filing any document prepared with AI assistance:

• Verify every case citation exists in official reporters
• Confirm all statutory and regulatory citations
• Check quoted language for accuracy
• Ensure legal propositions correctly state Michigan law
• Review the entire document for consistency and accuracy

MRPC 5.1 & 5.3: Supervisory Responsibilities

#

Michigan Rules 5.1 and 5.3 establish supervision requirements for managing attorneys over both lawyers and nonlawyers.

AI Supervision Framework:

Partners and supervisory lawyers must:

• Establish Policies: Create clear firm guidelines on AI use
• Provide Training: Educate attorneys and staff on ethical AI practices
• Implement Protocols: Develop verification and quality control procedures
• Monitor Compliance: Ensure firm members follow AI policies
• Take Responsibility: Accept ultimate responsibility for AI-assisted work product

AI as “Nonlawyer Assistance”:

Courts increasingly treat AI tools as analogous to nonlawyer assistants. Under Rule 5.3, attorneys must supervise AI use with the same care applied to supervising paralegals, requiring verification, oversight, and quality control.

Billing Considerations Under MRPC 1.5

#

Michigan Rule 1.5 requires that fees be reasonable. AI use raises important billing questions:

Permissible Billing

#

• Time spent developing and refining AI prompts
• Time reviewing, editing, and improving AI outputs
• Time verifying AI-generated research and citations
• Actual time invested in completing work product

Prohibited Billing

#

• Billing for time not actually spent
• Charging for hypothetical “manual” hours saved by AI
• Misrepresenting AI-assisted work as entirely manual
• Fees that are unreasonable given AI efficiency gains

Best Practices for AI Billing

#

1. Transparency: Disclose AI-assisted billing practices to clients
2. Actual Time: Bill only for time actually expended
3. Value Consideration: Consider whether AI efficiencies warrant reduced fees
4. Client Communication: Discuss AI billing in engagement letters

Michigan Court Considerations

#

Michigan Supreme Court

#

The Michigan Supreme Court has authority over attorney conduct through the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct and court rules. Attorneys should monitor for any orders or rules addressing AI use.

Michigan Court of Appeals and Trial Courts

#

Michigan courts may issue standing orders or local rules regarding AI disclosure. Best practices include:

• Checking local court rules and standing orders
• Disclosing AI use when required or appropriate
• Certifying the accuracy of all filed documents

Federal Courts in Michigan

#

The U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Michigan follow federal AI guidance and local rules. Attorneys practicing in federal court should:

• Review any standing orders on AI disclosure
• Comply with certification requirements
• Monitor evolving federal court AI policies

Practical Compliance Framework

#

Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct Reference

#

Malpractice and Risk Management

#

Michigan attorneys should address malpractice implications of AI use:

Insurance Considerations:

• Review policy coverage for AI-related claims
• Disclose AI use to insurers if required
• Document verification procedures as evidence of reasonable care
• Consider coverage implications before adopting new AI tools

Risk Mitigation Strategies:

• Implement robust verification protocols
• Maintain detailed records of AI use and verification
• Establish clear firm policies on appropriate AI use
• Train staff on AI risks and ethical obligations

Frequently Asked Questions

#

Resources

#

Michigan Resources

#

• Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct
• State Bar of Michigan Ethics Opinions
• SBM Ethics Helpline: (888) 558-4760

National Resources

#

• ABA Formal Opinion 512 - National guidance on attorney AI use
• AI Hallucinations in Courts - Sanctions cases and verification requirements
• State-by-State AI Ethics Guide - Compare guidance across jurisdictions