North Carolina · state trial court
Revised Administrative Order 25-09 In Re: Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Superior Court Proceedings
A party who generates, offers or materially relies on AI work must promptly disclose the nature and scope of that use. Counsel must independently review, verify and approve any AI output before relying on it, and the order supplies a disclosure chart and a checklist form.
Tracker entry · North Carolina
- Court. Superior Court, Judicial District 25 (Cabarrus County)COURT
- Level. state trial courtLEVEL
- Date. filed 8 December 2025DATED
- What it requires. disclosure, verification dutyREQUIRES
- Source. Read the documentSOURCE
Last checked · we opened the source on that day and drew the requirement above from its text.
This is a trial-court order rather than a statewide rule, and it is the longest document in the tracker. It builds a framework for identifying, disclosing and addressing AI issues in civil and criminal proceedings, and it says explicitly that it is not intended to stifle innovation or to change any party’s burden.
It defines its terms before it imposes anything: AI against generative AI, large language models, synthetic media, deepfakes, AI-assisted work, AI-generated evidence, public against enterprise tools, and hallucination. Disclosure is triggered when a party generates, offers or materially relies on AI work, and the disclosure has to cover the nature and scope of that use. Counsel must independently review, verify and approve AI output before relying on it, retain authority to override or reject it, and remain responsible for the work product. The order attaches an AI disclosure guidance chart and a checklist form.
This entry is descriptive, not legal advice. It records what one document says. Read the order that governs your own division before you rely on any of it, and check whether it has changed since the date above.
Back to every jurisdiction in the tracker, or readhow to check an AI citation before you file.