Legal & Courts · Readiness Assessment
Court & Clerk AI Readiness
Is your court ready for Rule of Court 10.430?
0
of 30
Ad HocDevelopingDefinedManagedOptimized
No score yet
Answer the questions below
What you get, and what it costs. Your score, readiness level, and highest-priority gap appear immediately, free. Enter your email at the end for the complete section-by-section report and action plan.
California Rule of Court 10.430 required any court that does not prohibit generative AI to adopt a use policy by December 15, 2025. That date has passed. A court that never formally addressed AI is covered by the rule, not exempt from it. This self-check scores you against the rule's required elements plus redaction, records access, and vendor vetting.
Scoring: 0 = Not in place · 1 = Partial · 2 = Fully in place. Your answers stay in your browser.
Your Organization (optional)
For your report1. Rule 10.430 compliance
1.1
A generative-AI use policy is adopted, covering staff (any purpose) and judicial officers (non-adjudicative).
1.2
The policy prohibits entering confidential/personal/nonpublic information into public AI.
1.3
The policy addresses accuracy, bias prevention, disclosure, and ethics compliance.
2. Operationalization
2.1
Staff and judicial officers have been trained on the policy.
2.2
There is an approved-tool list and someone who owns approvals.
2.3
AI output used in court communications is verified by a person before issue.
3. Redaction (CRC 1.201)
3.1
There is a process to screen public filings for protected identifiers.
3.2
SSNs and financial account numbers appear only as last-four; MC-120 handled confidentially.
3.3
Staff never upload unredacted filings into public AI tools.
4. Records & access (CRC 2.503)
4.1
Retention and destruction follow the schedule, with holds honored.
4.2
Access tiers are enforced. Family, DV, and custody records are not available by public remote access.
4.3
New search or AI features have been checked so they don't over-expose protected records.
5. Vendors & public-facing AI
5.1
E-filing, records, and AI vendors are vetted (data ownership, no training on court data, access-tier fidelity).
5.2
Any public-facing AI tool discloses it is AI and does not give legal advice.
5.3
Public-facing tools meet ADA and language-access needs and route to a human.