A message from Presiding Judge Sergio C. Tapia II

---

JUNE 2026

Artificial Intelligence at the Court and Expanding Early Resolution in Unlawful Detainer Cases

Well into my second year as Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Court), I want to update you on both the initiatives taking root from last year's groundwork and an emerging issue that warrants a clear statement of our approach. Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how we work and live, and the Court is no exception. We are approaching AI thoughtfully and deliberately, and I want to share how we are evaluating its use. I am also pleased to report that one of last year’s priorities has moved from vision to reality: we launched two unlawful detainer pilot programs at the Stanley Mosk and Compton Courthouses to expand early resolution of these cases. Finally, attorneys interested in serving on a panel representing indigent defendants in misdemeanor appeals are encouraged to apply to our Appellate Panel.

AI in the Court: What You Need to Know

As part of our continued progress, the Court is carefully evaluating how emerging AI tools can be used responsibly to support court operations, whether assisting judicial officers and court staff or improving the experience of court users. While technology continues to evolve rapidly, our guiding principle remains unchanged: judicial decision‑making rests solely with judicial officers. Judges will continue to weigh evidence, apply the law, and render decisions in accordance with the California Rules of Court, Standards of Judicial Administration 10.80, and the California Code of Judicial Ethics.

Standard 10.80 governs how judicial officers may use AI in their adjudicative role. It prohibits the entry of confidential, personally identifying, or other nonpublic information into public AI systems and requires judicial officers to independently review AI-generated content for accuracy, bias, and hallucinations. The review process will be familiar to judicial officers because it mirrors the oversight they already apply to work product from research attorneys and law clerks.

To ensure responsible use and maintain public trust, the Court has adopted internal AI policies governing non-adjudicative tasks. These policies strictly limit AI use to Court‑approved systems, prohibit entering confidential, sealed, or personally identifiable information into public tools, and require users to verify outputs, monitor for bias, and disclose when AI generates public‑facing content. Users must also follow all security protocols and report incidents promptly. With these safeguards in place, the Court can confidently and responsibly test whether narrowly scoped tools can enhance efficiency and improve the court‑user experience.

The Court recently launched a limited pilot with Learned Hand, an AI platform designed for judicial environments. Here are the facts. Currently, a small group of supervising research attorneys in the Court’s Civil Division is testing the tool in a controlled, secure environment, entirely separate from live case environments, by analyzing its outputs on motions that have already been decided. Learned Hand is held to the same standard as law clerks and research attorneys: accurate legal research, sound analysis, neutral and judge-ready writing, and reliable work product. If the tool meets these expectations, testing may expand to judicial officers and other disciplines, again using only previously adjudicated motions.

The Court will not deploy Learned Hand in live case environments until it has been thoroughly vetted and we are confident in its performance and reliability. Even with a successful evaluation, full implementation remains several months, if not years, away.

AI may prove valuable in administrative contexts, but it will never replace the human judgment at the heart of justice. To learn more about the Court’s approach and safeguards, visit our AI information page: AI in the Court.

Eviction Diversion: Two Pilots Supporting Early Resolution

Los Angeles County continues to experience some of the highest eviction filing volumes in the nation, placing individuals and families at heightened risk of housing instability and homelessness. Recognizing the profound impact eviction can have on community well‑being, I convened an Eviction Diversion Roundtable with City and County partners last year to explore collaborative solutions that promote stability and ensure meaningful access to justice. I am pleased to share that two pilot programs have since launched, developed in partnership with City, County, and legal services partners, with the shared goal of keeping tenants housed while making landlords whole.

The Compton Courthouse launched the Eviction Diversion Pilot Program (EDPP) on April 20 in partnership with the Los Angeles County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs. The program offers no‑cost mediation and targeted rental assistance in limited jurisdiction unlawful detainer cases involving unpaid rent. Settlement conferences are mediated by Community Legal Aid of Southern California, and eligible participants may receive up to $10,000 per household to cover past‑due and prospective rent.

To be eligible, cases must involve unpaid rent, both parties must agree to mediation, at least one party must have a household income at or below 120% of AMI, and the property must be located within the Compton Courthouse service area. A Standing Order requires plaintiffs to serve the Notice Regarding Services (Form SCLAC CIV 317) with the complaint and summons to make litigants aware of the program. Attorneys should advise clients early about mediation options, rental‑assistance pathways, and required notices to avoid delays.

The Stanley Mosk Courthouse launched a Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) pilot on March 16, offering same-day settlement conferences in limited jurisdiction unlawful detainer cases to promote resolution before trial. Judicial officers may order parties to participate in the MSC before proceeding. Settlement conferences are conducted by court-trained temporary judges who facilitate discussion and explore solutions. If no settlement is reached, the matter proceeds to trial.

A Standing Order requires plaintiffs filing eligible unlawful detainer actions at Mosk to serve the Notice Regarding Services (Form SCLAC CIV 313) with the complaint and summons. The notice connects litigants to the We Are LA program, sponsored by the Mayor’s Fund, which supports pilot participants.

Building on the momentum of these two pilots, a third eviction diversion program is slated to launch at the Van Nuys Courthouse this summer, extending early-resolution services to the San Fernando Valley and furthering the Court's commitment to countywide housing stability. More details will be shared as the program takes shape.

Appellate Division: Call for Attorneys to Represent Indigent Defendants

The Court’s Appellate Division is seeking qualified attorneys to join its panel representing indigent defendants in misdemeanor appeals. Panel attorneys play a vital role in ensuring that appellate review is fair, consistent, and grounded in the constitutional guarantees that protect all litigants, thus providing representation to those who would otherwise have none.

Appointed counsel are compensated through the Professional Appointee Court Expenditure (PACE) program at a rate of $100 per hour and receive case assignments on an alphabetical rotation, with limited exceptions for related pending appeals. Service on the panel offers attorneys a meaningful opportunity to sharpen appellate advocacy skills, contribute to the fair administration of justice, support vulnerable litigants, and provide meaningful access to justice.

Applicants must be members of the California Bar in good standing with strong research and writing skills, and familiarity with criminal law, criminal procedure, and the misdemeanor appellate process. Interested attorneys should submit a cover letter, resume, and two recent writing samples to Presiding Judge Patti Jo McKay, care of Lynette K. Brooks, at LBrooks@lacourt.ca.gov.