California SB 574 and the Responsible Use of Generative AI in Legal Practice

Ryan Wu
Ryan Wu
Capstone Law APC

Ryan Wu is a partner at Capstone Law APC, where he leads the firm’s appeals and complex motions team. A State Bar of California Certified Specialist in Appellate Law and an expert in class and PAGA procedure, he has won several important victories for consumers and workers before the California Supreme Court.

John Stobart
John Stobart
Capstone Law APC

John Stobart is senior counsel at Capstone Law APC and a State Bar of California Certified Specialist in Appellate Law. He has drafted more than two dozen writs, petitions, and appeals, and has drafted and argued scores of dispositive motions at the trial court level. His practice focuses on representing employees and consumers in complex litigation, primarily wage-and-hour class actions and PAGA representative actions.

Live Video-Broadcast: December 10, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

SB 574 Turns Your AI Habits Into Statutory Duties

SB 574 (Chapter 858, Statutes of 2026) takes effect January 1, 2027. New Business and Professions Code section 6068.1 adds express duties for lawyers who use generative AI. Amended Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 adds a separate personal citation verification requirement for covered court filings.

Enter client records into a system you have not vetted, and you risk breaching the statute’s access restriction on confidential and personal identifying information. Reuse a prior brief, and its citations still need personal verification regardless of source. Let co-counsel add authority shortly before filing, and you need a clear answer on who reviews it. Discover an omitted disclosure after submission, and correction duties and sanctions procedures run on separate tracks. The statute sets no prescribed disclosure form, so wording and placement become judgment calls.

You leave with a working review process: an annotated statutory overview, a tool and information review checklist, an output and citation review checklist, and illustrative disclosure language for discussion. Two scenarios, an AI-assisted client advice letter and a co-counsel brief, walk through the key decision points. The program separates what the statute requires from existing ethics duties and recommended practice, so your controls rest on judgment, not a form.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • What SB 574 Covers
    How the statutory definition of generative AI reaches functions inside mixed-purpose research and office tools, and where the separate provisions for arbitrators, the Judicial Council, and certified ADR providers fit.
  • Judgment Stays With You
    How competence, diligence, and the bar on delegating the practice of law to generative AI interact with your existing duties on client communication, informed consent, fees, supervision, and training.
  • Protecting Client Information
    How the statutory access restriction on confidential, personal identifying, and other nonpublic information changes the questions you ask about a system before entering client data.
  • Verifying Output and Citations
    How AI output verification differs from personal citation verification under amended CCP section 128.7, including recycled briefs, late edits, AI summaries, and the discovery exclusion.
  • Court Disclosure Decisions
    How to read the statutory disclosure language, check applicable court requirements, weigh wording and placement without assuming a prescribed statutory form, and separate required court disclosure from disclosure you may consider for public content.
  • Allocating Review and Correction
    How to divide review among drafting lawyers, signers, co-counsel, and staff, respond to errors found after submission, and build proportionate firm policies, access controls, and training.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: December 10, 2026

  • 2:30 pm – 4:40 pm Eastern
  • 1:30 pm – 3:40 pm Central
  • 12:30 pm – 2:40 pm Mountain
  • 11:30 am – 1:40 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Ryan Wu, Partner | Capstone Law APC

Ryan Wu is a partner at Capstone Law APC, where he leads the firm’s appeals and complex motions team. A State Bar of California Certified Specialist in Appellate Law and an expert in class and PAGA procedure, he has won several important victories for consumers and workers before the California Supreme Court. He also oversees the firm’s high-stakes fee disputes and settlement approval work.

  • Education & Credentials

Ryan earned his law degree from the University of Michigan Law School in 2001, where he served as an associate editor of the Michigan Journal of Law Reform and contributed to the law school newspaper. He received his undergraduate degree in political science, with honors, from the University of California, Berkeley. Licensed in California since 2002, he is admitted before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits, and the United States District Courts for the Northern, Eastern, Central, and Southern Districts of California. He is fluent in Mandarin Chinese.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Ryan received the California Lawyer Attorney of the Year (CLAY) award for Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, 59 Cal.4th 348 (2014). The Daily Journal has twice named one of his cases a Top Appellate Reversal of the year, including the seminal McGill v. Citibank N.A., 2 Cal.5th 945 (2017). He was named a Southern California Super Lawyer in 2023 and 2024, and Worksafe recognized him as its 2024 Worker Health & Safety Hero for his work advancing workplace safety and justice.

  • Professional Involvement

Ryan serves on the Committee for Appellate Courts of the California Lawyers Association (CLA) and is an editor of CLA’s monthly Litigation Update. His writing has appeared in the California Litigation Review, the California Labor & Employment Review, the Daily Journal, and Los Angeles Lawyer. He contributes to Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB) and is a frequent invited speaker at professional conferences.

  • Experience

Ryan’s practice centers on appellate briefing and complex motion practice in class and PAGA litigation, from the trial court through the California Supreme Court. Alongside his appellate work, he played a central role in achieving the widely publicized Ford transmission settlement, valued at over $100 million.

 

John Stobart, Senior Counsel | Capstone Law APC

John Stobart is senior counsel at Capstone Law APC and a State Bar of California Certified Specialist in Appellate Law. He has drafted more than two dozen writs, petitions, and appeals, and has drafted and argued scores of dispositive motions at the trial court level. His practice focuses on representing employees and consumers in complex litigation, primarily wage-and-hour class actions and PAGA representative actions.

  • Education & Credentials

John graduated cum laude from Thomas Jefferson School of Law, where he was a member of the mock trial competition team, and earned his undergraduate degree from The Ohio State University. Licensed in California since 2007, he is admitted before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits and the United States District Courts for the Eastern, Central, and Southern Districts of California.

  • Recognition & Leadership

John received the 2019 Daily Journal Reversal of the Year Award for his work before the Ninth Circuit in Nguyen v. Nissan N.A., No. 18-16344 (9th Cir. 2019). He is also a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers (CAAL), an election-only organization devoted to excellence in appellate practice.

  • Professional Involvement

John’s appellate work extends to the California Supreme Court, where he handled amicus work on behalf of Bet Tzedek in Kim v. Reins, 9 Cal.5th 73.

  • Experience

John has built his entire career in litigation, combining appellate briefing with significant complex and long-cause trial experience, and has successfully upheld judgments and verdicts on appeal. Before joining Capstone in 2018, he defended clients against civil liability in catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases, including as an associate at Veatch, Carlson, Grogan & Nelson. His clients included a railroad, public schools, small businesses, and commercial and residential landowners.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Understanding SB 574 and the Lawyer Duties Governing Generative AI | John Stobart & Ryan Wu | 2:30pm – 3:30pm

This session explains what SB 574 requires and how its requirements fit into everyday legal practice. Examples address AI features embedded in research platforms and office software, handling client information, reviewing generated work, and retaining professional judgment.

BREAK | 3:30pm – 3:40pm

SESSION 2 – Applying SB 574 to Litigation and Firm Workflows | John Stobart & Ryan Wu | 3:40pm – 4:40pm

This session follows a matter from research and drafting through final review, filing, and correction. It addresses citation verification and court disclosure while showing how responsibility, supervision, and tool selection fit into a workable process.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Illinois

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success Tue, November 10, 2026
Live Webcast