For In-House Counsel — Promise Legal Insights
Insights for In-House Counsel
GCs, Chief AI Officers, and the AI oversight stack at growth-stage and public companies.
In-house counsel at growth-stage and public companies are now the front line for AI governance, 10-K disclosure rigor, AI-washing securities risk, and post-McDonald's personal-officer-liability questions. The body of law applying to a Chief AI Officer in 2026 didn't exist in 2023. The board memos, materiality analyses, and oversight artifacts a GC produces today have a substantially different evidentiary purpose than they did even 18 months ago.
This hub is for GCs, deputy GCs, and Chief AI Officers navigating the new layer of board, SEC, and Caremark/Marchand-derivative obligations around AI.
Questions This Hub Answers
- What does the SEC actually want in a 10-K AI disclosure (and what constitutes hype)?
- After <em>In re McDonald's</em>, what oversight does my role personally require?
- How do <em>Marchand</em> and <em>Caremark</em> apply when AI is the mission-critical risk?
- What does AI-washing enforcement (Presto, etc.) tell me about pre-clearance discipline?
- How do I build a defensible AI governance log for personal-liability protection?
- How do TRAIGA, the EU AI Act, and the SEC's AI scrutiny stack for my company?
Featured Insights
Hand-picked recent posts for this audience.
- AI-Washing Litigation in 2026: What Public-Company GCs Need to Know
- Drafting AI Disclosures for the 10-K: Materiality Without Hype
- The Marchand Test for AI Governance: What Boards Owe Their Shareholders
- After McDonald's: Why Chief AI Officers Are Now Personally Liable for Oversight Failures
Browse all posts in this hub →
Browse by Topic
Topic-specific deep-dives across the blog:
Have a specific question?
Promise Legal works with the operators behind these audiences every day. Talk to our team about scoping the right legal infrastructure for your stage.