Does the tracker cover every New York court?

No. The tracker covers the federal courts in New York — the four district courts, the four bankruptcy courts and the Second Circuit, with the individual practices their judges publish. The New York state courts' own rules and part rules are not yet covered, so the tracker holds no state-court instrument and says nothing about what a state court requires. An instrument published after the last sweep appears once it is verified; verify any requirement against the court's own posting before relying on it.

New York Courts AI Filing Rules Tracker

Court- and judge-level AI filing rules in the covered New York courts — the provisions of judges' individual practices and the court orders on generative AI in filings, where a covered court or judge has adopted them — tracked verbatim from the issuing courts. At activation the covered courts are the federal courts in New York; the state courts' own rules are not yet covered. Each entry below links its verified rule card with citation, confidence, and last-verified date.

The answer in one screen

Do New York courts require you to disclose AI use in court filings?

BenchPath answers only from its verified corpus. The tracker on this page lists every New York AI-specific instrument BenchPath has verified in the covered courts — read live from the published rules, each with its official citation, confidence label and last-verified date — so the current answer is the tracked list itself. Requirements vary by court and by judge: read the court's own rule and the assigned judge's individual practices before filing, and treat a court with no tracked instrument as 'none on record with BenchPath', never as 'no requirement'.

Tracked instruments: 7; 0 statewide · 0 district · 7 judge-level
Preempted or vacated: 0; 0 rescinding or superseding orders
Newest instrument: November 2, 2026; oldest November 2, 2026
Verified through: November 2, 2026; latest source check on any entry

Status is taken from each instrument's own recorded text; nothing is inferred. Cite this page with the date you read it, or download the same rows as CSV (one row per tracked instrument, with its rule page URL). Procedural information only — not legal advice.

By district

Tracked AI filing instruments by district: counties, tracked count, preempted or vacated count, newest date
District	Counties	Tracked	Preempted or vacated	Newest
Statewide	0	7	0	November 2, 2026

Change log — the 7 newest instruments

Dated by effective date (or verification date when none is recorded); the full history with filters follows below.

November 2, 2026JudgeJudge Nelson S. Roman (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Cases: 7. Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”)As recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeJudge John P. Cronan (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules and Practices for Pro Se Litigants: C. Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) Tools. All litigants, including pro se litigants,As recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeJudge Analisa Torres (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: VI. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure RuleAs recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeJudge Cathy Seibel (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules of Practice: 12. Artificial IntelligenceAs recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeJudge Analisa Torres (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Cases: VII. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure RuleAs recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeJudge Dale E. Ho (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: 8. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Any party who uses generative artificialAs recorded
November 2, 2026JudgeMagistrate Judge Henry J. Ricardo (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: V. Artificial IntelligenceAs recorded

Regime highlights from the covered courts

A curated tour of the strongest tracked regimes appears here once instruments are verified — it is never written ahead of the corpus. The complete tracked list is read live from the verified corpus in “Every tracked New York AI rule” below, so a newly published covered-court instrument appears there the moment it publishes.

A coverage statement, not a statewide answer

This page speaks from the instruments the federal courts in New York publish and BenchPath has read; it makes no claim about a posting BenchPath has not read since the last sweep, and none about the New York state courts, whose rules are not yet covered. Verify any court's requirements against the court's own postings.

Every tracked New York AI rule (7)

Read live from the verified corpus — newest first. A newly published covered-court AI rule appears here automatically.

Struck-through entries are preempted or vacated but still posted — kept verbatim as history, never deleted.

November 2026

JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge Nelson S. Roman (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Cases: 7. Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”)
Individual Practices in Civil Cases of Judge Nelson S. Roman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted August 24th, 2026): section 7. Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Nelson S. Roman · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge John P. Cronan (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules and Practices for Pro Se Litigants: C. Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) Tools. All litigants, including pro se litigants,
Individual Rules and Practices for Pro Se Litigants of Judge John P. Cronan, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted October 23rd, 2025): section C. Use of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) Tools. All litigants, including pro se litigants, — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge John P. Cronan · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge Analisa Torres (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: VI. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule
Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases of Judge Analisa Torres, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted November 6th, 2025): section VI. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Analisa Torres · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge Cathy Seibel (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules of Practice: 12. Artificial Intelligence
Individual Rules of Practice of Judge Cathy Seibel, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted September 15th, 2026): section 12. Artificial Intelligence — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Cathy Seibel · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge Analisa Torres (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Cases: VII. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule
Individual Practices in Civil Cases of Judge Analisa Torres, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted November 6th, 2025): section VII. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Analisa Torres · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Judge Dale E. Ho (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: 8. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Any party who uses generative artificial
Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases of Judge Dale E. Ho, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted October 8th, 2026): section 8. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Any party who uses generative artificial — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Dale E. Ho · verified November 2, 2026
JudgeNovember 2, 2026
Magistrate Judge Henry J. Ricardo (S.D.N.Y.) — Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases: V. Artificial Intelligence
Individual Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases of Magistrate Judge Henry J. Ricardo, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, as the judge's own court page links it (posted March 9th, 2026): section V. Artificial Intelligence — verbatim from the judge's own document (official PDF, sha-custodied). Judge-specific requirement: applies in cases before this judge alongside the Local Rules and the federal rules.
Statewide · Judge Henry J. Ricardo · verified November 2, 2026

Method: every document captured for the covered courts is swept for AI-filing instruments during composition, and the registered sources are monitored on their recorded cadence (receipts in the public repository's unit-close records). Also see the Florida AI rules tracker, the Texas AI rules tracker and the California AI rules tracker. Procedural information only — not legal advice; confirm requirements with the court before filing.