Ethics Q&A
Q: May a lawyer be paid a referral fee from another lawyer who has recommended his services?

A: Arizona does not allow referral fees for merely recommending another lawyer or referring a case. However, lawyers who are not in the same firm may divide a fee as provided in ER 1.5(e), so long as three conditions are met. See Ariz. 04-02.

Need ethics advice? Members of the State Bar can get free ethics advice concerning their own prospective conduct by calling the State Bar's Ethics Hotline at 602-340-7284.



Discovery Masters
Learn when discovery masters can help a case--and when they can't. Read the article.


All For You...

Guide Offers Resources to Improve Your Practice
Improve the efficiency of your law practice with the 2004 Law Office & Trial Support Services Guide. The guide, found in the May issue of Arizona Attorney magazine, lists many businesses that provide products and services to attorneys and law firms.

Read back issues of eLegal.

| Disclaimer | Feedback |
| About eLegal |
Copyright 2004
State Bar of Arizona

Bar Building Search Progresses
The State Bar's review of alternative buildings is quickly progressing as it seeks to improve its office facilities. This update is part of our effort to keep members informed. Read more.

Clay Jenkinson Returns As Thomas Jefferson
Dr. Jenkinson presents a historically accurate characterization of Jefferson and compares the ethical issues lawyers face today with those faced 200 years ago in this ethics seminar on April 30, 2004. Seminar info.

AzbarMail: Learn more about new e-mail service for members only.

Legal Links

Lawyer Jobs Available

Classifieds

Legal Dictionary

Legal Resources

Expert and Consultant Directory

Member Benefits

 


In which format would you like to receive this eNewsletter in the future, plain text or text w/graphics? Check the appropriate box below:

Text w/Graphics(HTML)

Plain Text

UNSUBSCRIBE:
You are receiving this message because the State Bar of Arizona believes you will benefit from this information. If you would like to unsubscribe to this mailing, please click here.

High Court Wary of Making 'Ring' Retroactive
The Supreme Court appeared wary Monday of opening the door to retroactive application of its Ring v. Arizona ruling, which said judges, not jurors, should determine the facts that lead to death sentences. Read more.

Speedy Trial at Issue for Mentally Ill Inmates
A Maricopa Superior Court hearing officer has dismissed charges against two mentally ill inmates, ruling their rights were violated because they did not get timely treatment to render them psychologically competent to stand trial. Read more.

Big Names Enlisted to Stop 9th Circuit Split
The son of California Chief Justice Ronald George and a lawyer known for his behind-the-scenes juice, has organized a troop of big-name lawyers from across the political spectrum to oppose splitting the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Read more.

Bar Unveils Web Sites on May 3
The State Bar unveils two new Web sites on Monday, May 3rd - one for members, the other for the public. Read more.

Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education
Governor Janet Napolitano and the Hayzel B. Daniels Bar Association are sponsoring a free program on May 1 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision. Read more.

Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One Division Two
April 15, 2004 - CR 02-0937 - State v. Nieves
Is a defendant's confession that she smothered her child admissible when there is no other evidence suggesting her child's death was the result of criminal conduct? Read opinion.

April 8, 2004 - 2 CA-CV 2003-0069 - Waterfall Economidis v. Pima County
Under a contract for services between a county and a private law firm, is the county bound to uphold its employees' assurances of payment when those assurances conflict with explicit contract terms and when the contract contains an integration clause? Read opinion.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals
April 16, 2004 - No. 02-73939 - DeMartinez v. Ashcroft
Service to Mexican alien's attorney of an order explaining the penalties for failure to voluntarily depart constituted adequate notice to the alien per 8 U.S.C. section 1229c(d). She was correctly found ineligible for relief due to her failure to depart voluntarily. Read opinion.

April 16, 2004 - No. 02-30375 - U.S. v. Prime
Admission of expert handwriting analysis testimony was not an abuse of discretion; denial of two motions to substitute counsel on the eve of trial was not an abuse of discretion; jury exposure to extrinsic evidence had no impact on the verdict. Read opinion.