Loading…
General Order 2026-04, signed by Honorable Mark Nareau, Presiding Judge: the duty of candor of lawyers and Pro Se litigants to the court; by presenting a filing the attorney or unrepresented party certifies that it is the product of reasonable inquiry and that the authorities cited do in fact exist and are accurately represented; the court does not regulate, restrict, or require disclosure of the tools used, artificial intelligence programs included, but the person who signs and submits a filing bears responsibility for its contents; fabricated quotations, nonexistent authority, or materially inaccurate descriptions of legal authority a breach of the duty of candor; sanctions proportionate to the conduct - striking the filing in whole or in part, monetary sanctions, referral to appropriate disciplinary authorities or any other measure the court deems appropriate; the order intended to be incorporated into a future revision of the Local Rules of Court effective January 1, 2027, and then deemed automatically revoked and rescinded.
California > Third Appellate District > Lassen County > Superior Court of California, County of Lassen
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LASSEN GENERAL ORDER 2026-04 USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN FILINGS Lawyers and Pro Se litigants have a long-established duty of candor to this court. All pleadings, motions, briefs, and other papers filed herein, whether submitted by counsel or by a party appearing pro se, are also subject to this requirement. By presenting a filing to the Court, the attorney or unrepresented party certifies that the filing is the product of reasonable inquiry and that the authorities cited therein do in fact exist and are accurately represented. It is not the province of the court to regulate, restrict, or require disclosure of the tools or assistance used to prepare filings. Attorneys and unrepresented parties may employ any lawful means of drafting or research, including artificial intelligence programs. Nevertheless, regardless of the method of preparation, the person who signs and submits a filing bears responsibility for its contents. The use of technology does not diminish, shift, or excuse that responsibility. The submission of a filing which includes fabricated quotations, nonexistent authority, or materially inaccurate descriptions of legal authority constitutes a breach of the duty of candor to the court. This principle is not new. The submission of fictional authority has never been permissible. That such authority may appear facially plausible or be technologically generated does not alter the analysis. If the Court determines that a filing constitutes a breach of the duty of candor, or other applicable governing rules, the Court may impose appropriate sanctions. Sanctions will be proportionate to the conduct at issue and tailored to the circumstances of the case. Sanctions may include, but are not limited to, striking the filing in whole or in part, monetary sanctions, referral to appropriate disciplinary authorities, or any other measure the court deems appropriate to protect the integrity of the judicial process. This general order is intended to be incorporated into a future revision of the Local Rules of Court of the Superior Court of California, County of Lassen, effective January 1, 2027. Upon successful incorporation into the Local Rules of Court, this General Order shall be deemed automatically revoked and rescinded. Dated: May 11, 2026 _______________________________ Honorable Mark Nareau Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LASSEN GENERAL ORDER 2026-04 USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN FILINGS Lawyers and Pro Se litigants have a long-established duty of candor to this court. All pleadings, motions, briefs, and other papers filed herein, whether submitted by counsel or by a party appearing pro se, are also subject to this requirement. By presenting
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-10-12 (California T4 Lassen build 2026-10-12) from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-lassen/docs/general-orders/general-order-2026-04.pdf (146492 bytes, sha256 a9a9bcd1300e7390312d1416470e0d878928037480ca9154f2d57724e561aece; 1 page; a printed text layer) with the shared verbatim composer (v2 reflow): the one page composed; the clerk's filing stamp - scanned onto the page and turned into text by Acrobat's ClearScan, its glyphs set in fonts ClearScan synthesized (every name begins “*”), its character codes OCR guesses the line reading runs into the heading set beside it - removed as chrome by font (the composer's opt-in stamp_fonts, added for these orders; its A/B regression, custody file ab-composer-stamp-fonts.log, composes 1,387 earlier compositions unchanged) with the page number - 20 chrome items; the Presiding Judge's signature is an image above the printed name, not text; proof 1 (whitespace-only) and proof 2 (same character multiset as the text layer minus chrome) pass. Review note: The order is to be incorporated into the Local Rules of Court effective January 1, 2027, and is then deemed revoked and rescinded; the review task on the proposed Local Rules of Court effective January 1, 2027, which the court posts for public comment (held), re-reads this card when those rules take effect. The clerk’s filing stamp is not part of the card’s text.
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.