Kaufman Ops

AI settings for a small law firm in Maryland

Checked against the source documents on October 26, 2026

Maryland's Rules Committee has proposed an AI comment to Rule 1.6, with comments due November 19, 2026. Whatever lands, the question it raises is where client facts go when a lawyer types them into a tool. The settings that answer that are on the main checklist. This page says which ones Maryland points at, and why.

What Maryland has said

Maryland State Bar Association AI and Legal Technology Task Force: MSBA publication E-6030-25 (no opinion number; nonbinding), An Overview of Ethical Considerations for Attorney Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence., 2025-04, date not printed on the document.

  1. Confidentiality. Do not expose confidential client information to tools that may train on or retain inputs; confidentiality breach listed as a core risk (per MSBA listing and Daily Record coverage).
  2. Competence. Duty of competent representation under Md. Rule 19-301.1 applies to GAI use (MSBA Overview). Proposed (229th Report, 2026-10-20): add the ABA technology sentence to cmt. [6] and a new cmt. [7] requiring independent review and verification of technology output (Report pp. 15-16, 149-150).
  3. Supervision. Supervision of legal staff's AI use is addressed (MSBA listing).
  4. Fees. Charge reasonable fees; address fee adjustments for AI efficiencies.
  5. Disclosure. Disclose generative AI use to clients; avoid misrepresentations to the court.
  6. Verification. Attorneys must review GAI output to ensure it is accurate, reliable and trustworthy (MSBA Overview as quoted in Daily Record coverage). Proposed Rule 1-311(b): signature certifies the attorney confirmed the existence and authenticity of each legal authority cited (229th Report p.

The line about the tool itself. MSBA Overview: not confirmed; the full document could not be opened (member download); coverage references public vs enterprise tools that train on inputs. Proposed Rule 19-301.6 cmt. [20] (229th Report p. 161) names artificial intelligence tools among transmission methods requiring reasonable precautions. (Not available; document not opened)

One line from it: "for informational purposes only and is not binding" (MSBA listing E-6030-25, description).

The settings that answer it

  1. Use the business plan, not a personal one. On Claude Pro, Claude Max and ChatGPT Plus, training on chats is each user's own setting. On Claude Team, ChatGPT Business and Microsoft 365 Copilot with a work sign-in, business data is not used for training by default. On the checklist
  2. Turn off the training and feedback exceptions an admin can still turn off (Claude feedback, ChatGPT personal accounts that are still in use). On the checklist
  3. Set retention on purpose instead of taking the default. On the checklist
  4. Turn on single sign-on so a lawyer who leaves loses access the same day. On the checklist
  5. Decide on connectors, apps and agents before staff add them. On the checklist
  6. Pick a rule on memory, and teach temporary or incognito chats for one-off matter questions. On the checklist
  7. Put the vendor's written terms on training, retention, subprocessors and breach notice in the file. On the checklist
  8. Write the one-page staff instruction and a note for each new hire. On the checklist
  9. Keep a verification step before anything is filed. That is a procedure, not a setting, and no vendor sells it. On the checklist
  10. Decide what the engagement letter says about AI use and billing. That is yours to write; I only flag that the opinion raises it. On the checklist

Rules around it

Technology competence: No. Md. Rule 19-301.1 cmt. [6] currently lacks the ABA technology sentence; the Rules Committee Reporter's note (229th Report p.

In motion: Rules Committee 229th Report submitted to the Supreme Court of Maryland proposing AI-related amendments: Rule 1-311(b) signature certifies existence and authenticity of each cited authority; Rule 19-301.1 cmt. [6] technology competence and new cmt. [7] (independently review, verify and exercise judgment over technology output, including AI); Rule 19-301.6 cmt. [20] (AI tools among transmission methods); Rule 19-303.3 new cmt. [3] (verify accuracy and existence of cited authorities); Rule 19-305.3 retitled Responsibilities Regarding Non-Attorney Assistance. Comment period ends 2026-11-19; Court open meeting not yet scheduled on the rules page. 2026-11-19 (comment deadline; report submitted 2026-10-20) source; Rules Committee vote on the Rule 1-311 fake-citation amendment (Daily Record coverage of the March 2026 meeting that produced the 229th Report proposal). 2026-03-20 source

What this page is not

This is a tech settings page, not legal advice. The state document above is the ethics half and it is yours to read and decide on. I am not a lawyer. I link the source so you can check me.

Send me one screenshot

Crop out client names, send me a screenshot of your Claude, ChatGPT or Microsoft 365 admin settings page, and I'll write back what I'd change. Free. I never need a login.

If you want this kept current for your firm, that is the monthly desk: I watch these settings as the vendors change them and as your state changes its guidance, answer staff questions in writing, usually within one business day, and write up setup notes for each new hire. $500 a month, cancel any month.

Email nick@kaufmanops.com

Who wrote this

Nick Kaufman

I'm Nick Kaufman. I've spent six years in customer-facing technical support for SaaS, payments and CRM software, including three years at Tier 2 on a CRM built for financial advisors, whose firms work under SEC and FINRA rules. I'm not a lawyer and I don't give legal advice. I set up software so it does what the people responsible for it decided it should do.

Other states: the full list.