Trial starts next week. I've discovered that my client has lied to me.
I want to fire him.
How do I convince the judge to let me out?
You must protect the client's interests despite any dispute between you and the client and despite any wrongdoing of the client. Read Ethics Op. 09-02
Gift or Subsidy
CityNorth is a Phoenix development under review at the Arizona Supreme Court now. Read our pro-con.
Top 250 Law Firms Collectively Shrank by 5,259 Lawyers
A survey of the nation's top 250 law firms shows they collectively shed 5,259 lawyers in the past year, a drop of 4 percent. Read more.
Despite Gains, Gender Parity in Partnerships Is a Long Way Off
As Sullivan & Cromwell celebrates the promotion of four women to partner, experts warn that more work needs to be done industry-wide to shrink gender disparity in the partnership ranks. Read more.
Fed'l Judge Rules From Bench for ABA: 'Red Flags' Doesn't Apply to Lawyers
In a surprise ruling from the bench, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., agreed with the American Bar Association that the Federal Trade Commission exceeded its authority by applying its "red flags rule" to practicing lawyers. Read more.
State Bar Wins Two National Awards for Publications
The National Association of Bar Executives recently presented the State Bar with awards for Arizona Attorney magazine and A History of the State Bar of Arizona 1933-2008. Read more.
Attorneys Encourage South Phoenix Youngsters to Become Lawyers
The State Bar of Arizona and the Phoenix School of Law have teamed up together to launch the Diversity Pipeline Project. Volunteers will encourage 150 Cloves C. Campbell Sr. Elementary School students to stay in school and pursue law school. Read more.
Help Plan the Future of the State Bar of Arizona
The Long-Range Planning Committee of the Board of Governors is preparing a new Strategic Plan to guide the State Bar of Arizona during the coming five years. As part of the process of developing that Plan, the Committee is seeking input from the entire membership of the Bar. Read more.
Time To Get Creative
The annual Creative Arts Competition has kicked off at Arizona Attorney magazine. Submit your witty humor pieces, dramatic photography, clever fiction and other works by Jan. 15. Here are the categories.
Member-to-Member Referral Guide
Sign up now to advertise in Arizona Attorney's 2010 Member-to-Member Referral Guide. It can help bring you new business through referrals from other attorneys. Request information.
Arizona Appellate Practice Institute on Feb. 27
Register now for the Arizona Appellate Practice Institute on Feb. 27 in Phoenix. Keynote speakers are Hon. Mary M. Schroeder, former Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge, and Hon. Ruth McGregor, former Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice. Read more.
Apply for Professional Volunteer Opportunities until Nov. 23
The State Bar of Arizona's Appointments Committee will accept applications until Nov. 23 to serve on five court commissions and judicial selection boards. Read more.
Free In-Depth Fastcase Training on Nov. 18 May Qualify for CLE Credit
Fastcase will hold online classes on conducting in-depth research in the coming weeks that may qualify for CLE credit. The State Bar of Arizona offers free, unlimited access to Fastcase as a benefit to members. Read more.
LexisNexis® Coffee Break Webinars
They're fast, effective, and best of all - they're on the house! Choose from a menu of quick 20- or 60-minute sessions and discover powerful tools and proven techniques to help your business be more efficient and cost-effective. Read more.
National Adoption Day on Nov. 21
On Nov. 21, the Saturday before Thanksgiving, a record-setting 292 kids will join their forever families on National Adoption Day. More than 34 judicial officers have volunteered their Saturday to preside over the hearings at the Durango Juvenile Court Center. Read more.
Scam Targets Family Law Attorneys
The last reported e-mail scam targeted collections attorneys. Several members of the State Bar of Arizona have reported the most recent attack aimed at a different practice group. Read more.
Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One | Division Two
November 6, 2009 - 2 CA-CR 2009-0047 - State of Arizona v. Adam Scott King
Must a defendant establish he had acted solely out of fear of imminent danger in order to obtain a self-defense instruction, a requirement imposed by case law but not Arizona's self-defense statute, A.R.S. � 13-404; and if so, what is the quantum of evidence required to obtain such an instruction?
Did the trial court abuse its discretion by granting the defendant's motion for new trial on the ground the court had denied a requested self-defense instruction after finding the defendant had failed to produce "sufficient evidence" he had acted solely out of fear of imminent danger? Read opinion.
October 29, 2009 - CR 08-0698 - State v. Latham
1. May a person be convicted of kidnapping by intimidation when the victim
is "restrained" by virtue of a threat by the person relayed to the victim by
2. May a person be convicted of kidnapping when the victim, by intimidation,
is caused to leave her home, get in her car and drive away from the home? Read opinion.
9th Circuit Court of Appeals
October 28, 2009 - No. 06-15677 - Siracusano v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc.
In a securities fraud action alleging that defendant failed to disclose material information regarding its cold remedy drug, Zicam, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) in relying on the statistical significance standard to determine materiality, the district court made a decision that should have been left to the trier of fact; and 2) the inference that defendants withheld information intentionally or with deliberate recklessness was at least as compelling as the inference that they withheld the information innocently. Read opinion.
October 28, 2009 - No. 07-10528 - US v. Kilbride
In a prosecution arising from defendants' conduct relating to their business of sending unsolicited email, or spam, advertising adult websites, defendants' electronic mail fraud convictions and sentences are affirmed where: 1) no authority supported defendants' notion that a district court must provide a clear geographic definition of the relevant community in an obscenity prosecution; 2) a national community standard must be applied in regulating obscene speech on the Internet, but the district court's failure to instruct on this standard was not plain error; 3) defendants' as-applied vagueness challenge to the CAN-SPAM Act failed even applying a heightened requirement of clarity; and 4) the district court properly concluded that one defendant's related lawsuit was meritless and amounted to obstruction of justice. Read opinion.