Ethics Q&A
Q: When a new lawyer with a conflict joins a firm - how can the firm avoid imputing the conflict to other lawyers in the firm?

A: The new ethical rules allow for "infected" lawyers to be screened if (1) the new lawyer was not litigation counsel; (2) the lawyer is timely screened from any participation and receives no part of the fee; and (3) written notice is given to the affected former client. Read the new rules.

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.



Above Suspicion
The Arizona Supreme Court recently went against considered opinion when it found certain drug testing of firefighters unconstitutional. Attorney Gregory Fisher examines the ruling--and what underlies it. Read article.


All For You...

The Bar has unveiled its two new Web sites: www.myazbar.org, which is for members, and www.azbar.org, which has been redesigned for the public. Please take time to review the sites and their many new features.

Read back issues of eLegal.
| Disclaimer | Feedback |
| About eLegal |
Copyright 2004
State Bar of Arizona

Need Ethics? Come, Learn and Have Fun!
Learn the new ethics rules while having fun with Larry Cohen and his panel of judges during this 3-hour seminar on May 21, 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.

Federal Judge: Lawyers Not Subject to Mandated Privacy Rules
A federal judge has ruled that lawyers are not required to send government mandated "privacy notices" to their clients, as mandated by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Read more. Read the decision.

AZ Court: DUI Sentences Were Too Lenient
A decision by the Arizona Court of appeals indicates some drunken drivers have been getting off too easy in Arizona courtrooms. Read more.

Disabled Woman Can Sue Glendale District
A disabled woman who was fired by a local school district is free to sue the district for discrimination. The Supreme Court let stand a 9th Circuit ruling that Arizona public school districts are not shielded from lawsuits brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Read more.

Bar Contracts for New Office Building The State Bar has formally contracted to purchase a building in Phoenix. The agreement is subject to various conditions including final approval by the Board of Governors. Read more.

Arizona's Court-Annexed Arbitration Under Study
The Arizona Supreme Court has commissioned a multi-phase study of court-annexed mandatory arbitration for civil cases, which will include a survey of Arizona lawyers. Read more.

Lawyer Discipline Decisions Available Through MyAzbar.org
The Bar's new Web site for members, www.myazbar.org, now offers free access to Arizona lawyer discipline decisions via its homepage. Read more.

Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One Division Two
April 29, 2004 - CV 02-0650 - Lemons v. Showcase Motors, Inc.
Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment on a claim of breach of the implied warranty of merchantability under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. � 2301-12, et seq. and properly awarded attorneys' fees. Read opinion.

April 22, 2004 - 2 CA-CR 2003-0112 - State v. Sudden Rio Stroud
"May a defendant be convicted of both resisting arrest and second-degree escape based on the same conduct?" Read opinion.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals
April 29, 2004 - No. 02-35538, 02-35545 - Latman v. Burdette
Surcharging the debtors' "wild card" exemption, to account for funds not properly disclosed in their bankruptcy filings, was a permissible equitable remedy under the Bankruptcy Code and was not barred by election of remedies or res judicata. Read opinion.

April 30, 3004 - No. 02-10197, 02-10204 - U.S. v. Hickey
Defendant's interlocutory appeals raise no colorable claim under the collateral order doctrine and are dismissed. The order of disgorgement of $1.1 million in a civil action brought by the SEC did not bar the government from proceeding criminally against him, or from proving losses of more than $1.1 million. Read opinion.