Kaufman Ops

AI settings for a small law firm in Hawaii

Checked against the source documents on October 26, 2026

Hawaii's Supreme Court AI committee wrote in its final report that, if the claims in the New York Times suit against OpenAI hold up, what goes into an AI tool could be reachable by the companies hosting training data. The settings that answer that are on the main checklist. This page says which ones Hawaii points at, and why.

What Hawaii has said

Hawaii Supreme Court Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts (SCMF-24-0000305): SCMF-24-0000305 Final Report, Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts' Final Report to the Hawaii Supreme Court, 2025-12-15.

  1. Confidentiality. Entering client information into unsecured public AI tools risks a confidentiality breach; inputs could reach the companies hosting training data (HRPC 1.6, pp. 24-25).
  2. Competence. Understand GAI limits including hallucinations and carefully assess when to use it (HRPC 1.1, pp. 23-24).
  3. Supervision. Attorneys must supervise AI output as they would a law clerk or new associate; the buck stops with attorneys (HRPC 5.3, p. 26).
  4. Fees. Asks whether efficiency gains should change what is a reasonable fee; reaches no conclusion (pp. 31-32).
  5. Disclosure. Consider disclosing AI use, potentially to all parties (p. 26); a proposed court order and declaration form on AI use in filings is under Supreme Court consideration, not adopted (p. 10).
  6. Verification. Existing rules, including HRCP 11 and 26(g), already require validating authorities before filing; proposed declaration would state the filer verified cited authorities (pp. 10, 29).

The line about the tool itself. Recommends reviewing the vendor's terms of use before adopting an AI tool (aimed at the Judiciary's own adoption, p. 12); for lawyers, warns inputs may reach companies hosting training data (p. 25). No specific setting or opt-out guidance for lawyers. (p. 12 (section II.b) and p. 25 (section II.d.i.2, Confidentiality))

One line from it: "has no proposed rule changes at this time" (Final Report, Ethics Subcommittee, p. 40).

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. Put the vendor's written terms on training, retention, subprocessors and breach notice in the file. On the checklist
  7. Write the one-page staff instruction and a note for each new hire. On the checklist
  8. Keep a verification step before anything is filed. That is a procedure, not a setting, and no vendor sells it. On the checklist
  9. 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: Yes. Hawaii Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.1, Comment [6] (benefits and risks of relevant technology);

In motion: Proposed Order Regarding Use of AI and a filer declaration form (AI was used; cited authorities verified) under Hawaii Supreme Court consideration per Final Report p. 10; not adopted. Checked 2026-10-26: the Judiciary proposed-rule-changes page lists only an interpreter certification proposal (comments due 2026-11-30) and the Supreme Court various-orders page (newest order 2026-09-28) shows no 2026 AI order. 2025-12-15 source; Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts continued as a standing committee (Order No. 138 series on the various-orders page); no due date set 2025-12-17 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 [email protected]

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.