Q: May I participate in a non-profit lawyer referral service if I have to pay the service a percentage of the fees I earn on cases I received from referred matters?

A: Yes. Read the Supreme Court's emergency rule changes, prompted by a petition filed as the result of Op. 10-01. The court has not decided whether to adopt the rule changes permanently. The comment period on the emergency rule changes ended June 1.



Save time and money by expediting the creation and processing of subpoenas.



Diversity & Inclusion
Our Q&A with the State Bar's Diversity Director. Read more.






www.myazbar.org
www.azbar.org

Disclaimer | About eLegal | Feedback
Copyright 2010
State Bar of Arizona



Arizona Supreme Court Adopts Changes to Attorney Discipline System
The Arizona Supreme Court has approved rules making significant changes to the attorney discipline system in Arizona. The changes will maintain a fair and impartial system, while streamlining the attorney discipline process and decreasing the time and cost to process cases. Read more.

Supreme Court Job Announcement: Presiding Disciplinary Judge

ABA Testimony Reports Legal Community's Views of Kagan's Professional Qualifications
The American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has conveyed the results of an exhaustive study of the American legal community's perspective on the professional qualifications of U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan in light of her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the ABA committee summarized Kagan's reputation as sterling and noted that the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary had unanimously awarded her its highest rating, well qualified. Read more.

Sole Practitioners: One Is the Loneliest Number
If all someone did was watch lawyer shows or go to lawyer movies or read most newspaper stories about lawyers, he or she might conclude there are only three kinds of lawyers: prosecutors, criminal defense attorneys and lawyers who practice in big firms. Read more.



Lawyers on Call Address Foreclosure and Bankruptcy Issues
Volunteer attorneys for July's Lawyers on Call public service program will field callers' questions regarding foreclosures and bankruptcies. Lawyers On Call will air this evening on 12 News at 5 and 7 p.m. Read more.

2010 State Bar of Arizona Convention Highlight Video
The State Bar of Arizona added another successful convention under its belt from June 9 through 11. In its 77th year, the convention offered attendees with cutting edge seminars, an exciting expo with more than 60 vendors, and lively social events. The linked video clip highlights three days of convention fun! Click Here.

Arizona Attorney Continues to Seek Your Ideas For "There ought to be a law" Story
Arizona Attorney Magazine has extended its deadline to this Friday, July 9. Send them your thoughts. This story will be dedicated to the thinking of Arizona lawyers and legal leaders. Ideas can be on virtually any topic: jury instructions, obscenity, criminal procedure, immigration, patents, admiralty rules, law practice "in the cloud", ethics, malpractice, war crimes. You name it. Read more.

Attorney Suspended Despite Two Appeal Attempts
The Supreme Court of Arizona has denied the Petition for Review regarding Robert Arentz (Bar No. 005376) and has ordered that he be suspended from the practice of law for 60 days and serve two years of probation. Read more.

Maricopa County Superior Court Seeks Attorneys to Volunteer in Schools
The Maricopa County Superior Court needs Arizona attorneys to serve as court guides in local schools as part of the Courthouse Experience program. Read more.

Failure to Protect Client Interest Leads to Suspension for Three Attorneys
The Supreme Court of Arizona has ordered that Daniel Inserra (Bar No. 017284), Victoria R. Miranda (Bar No. 018511) and Paul M. Weich (Bar No. 014089) be suspended from practicing law. Read More.

State Bar Files Complaint Against Fraudulent "Attorney"
The State Bar of Arizona has filed a formal complaint - to cease and desist - with the Superior Court of Arizona against Robert J. Andrew for the unauthorized practice of law. Read More.

LexisNexis� Coffee Break Webinars - July 2010
They're fast, effective, and best of all - they're on the house! Choose from a menu of quick sessions and discover powerful tools and proven techniques to help your business be more efficient and cost-effective. View Calendar.


Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One
| Division Two

July 1, 2010 - CV 09-0223 - Simon v. Maricopa Medical Center
1. Did the trial court err in dismissing a complaint when the plaintiff mis-named the defendants which may not be jural entities (Phoenix Police Department and Maricopa Medical Center), but properly served the related jural entities with the complaint (City of Phoenix and the Maricopa County Special Health Care District)?
2. Did the superior court err in granting the District summary judgment for failure of service of the notice of claim when the notice was sent to the office of the clerk of the District, but named the Maricopa Medical Center?
3. Is the notice of claim statute unconstitutionally vague?
4. Was the District entitled to summary judgment for plaintiff's failure to attach and serve an expert opinion related to his malpractice claim pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes section 12-2603? Read opinion.

June 11, 2010 - 2 CA-CR 2009-0205 - STATE OF ARIZONA v. JOHN GEORGE PONSART JR.
Pursuant to A.R.S. � 13-4033, does this court have jurisdiction to consider a pleading defendant's appeal from a sentence that has been imposed after a contested probation violation proceeding? Read opinion.


9th Circuit Court of Appeals

July 2, 2010 - No. 09-35630- Kittel v. Thomas
In a habeas petition challenging a Bureau of Prisons (BOP) rule that categorically excluded from an early release incentive program prisoners whose offenses of conviction involved firearms possession, dismissal of the petition is affirmed where petitioner's claims were moot, and an order stating that Arrington v. Daniels, 516 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2008), applied to petitioner would simply reiterate a fact that was not in dispute. Read opinion.

June 29, 2010 - No. 09-56026- Retired Employees' Association v. County of Orange
In an action challenging Orange County's change to the structure of its health benefits under which the County began to split the pool of active and retired employees for purposes of setting premiums, the Ninth Circuit certified the following question to the Supreme Court of California: Whether, as a matter of California law, a California county and its employees can form an implied contract that confers vested rights to health benefits on retired county employees. Read opinion.

 


2010 CLE by the Sea



Upcoming CLE programs
Read more.




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.