Ethics Q&A
Q: Under the revised Ethical Rule 1.10, may a public defender office create a conflict unit and "screen" imputed conflicts involving former clients?

A: No. The conflict unit and the public defender office are considered one "firm" for purposes of ER 1.10, and referral of cases to the conflict unit would not resolve the conflict. Read Opinion 04-04.

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.

Professionalism in Practice
Our back-page columnist Roxie Bacon points to times when our behaviors are less than respectful. She recommends we try "a humbling exercise." Read article.

All For You...

Now Available - Client Care Guide! Help your clients understand the basics of working with an attorney. Order the Bar's revised version of the Client Care Guide.

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

Structuring Transactions for Optimal Tax Results
National experts in tax planning for real estate lead this two-part telephonic seminar on July 22 and July 23. Seminar info.

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

Legal Links

Lawyer Jobs Available


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

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.

Judgments Awarded Under New Statute of Limitations
A Superior Court Commissioner awarded multimillion-dollar judgments to two women who were victims of crimes that occurred decades ago. Theirs were the first lawsuits filed under "Geri's Law," which changed the statute of limitations for civil lawsuits that arise from criminal cases. Read more.

Court Rules on Mental Exams
Murder defendants cannot refuse a psychiatric exam requested by the prosecution if they intend to raise mental health as a death-penalty sentencing issue, Arizona's top court rules. Read more.

In Tucson Courtrooms, Drug Link is Inescapable
Week after week, cases coursing with drugs and alcohol consume our community's justice system. Read more.

State Bar Purchases Office Building
The State Bar has completed the purchase of a building in Phoenix to house its main office. It's a move that allows the Bar to reduce and better control its occupancy costs, while providing an improved facility for members, the public and staff. Read more.

Vacancy on Arizona Court of Appeals
The retirement of Judge William Garbarino has created a vacancy on the Arizona Court of Appeals. The deadline to apply is July 26. Read more.

eLegal Wins Award
The eLegal newsletter has received an "Award of Merit" from the Dalton Pen Communications Awards, a competitive contest that receives hundreds of international entries. eLegal was noted for its visual design, clarity, originality and organization.

Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One Division Two

June 29, 2004 - CV 03-0302 - Thomas v. City of Phoenix
Does the Uniform Building Code require a restaurant to lower the height of a portion of its bar for disabled access? Read opinion.

June 30, 2004 - 2 CA-CR 2002-0037 - State v. Garfield
Are the defenses in A.R.S. � 13-411 available to a defendant who is not a resident of a dwelling but who is present at the invitation of a resident and who asserts he shot the victim to protect the sanctity of the dwelling from an altercation between the victim and another guest? Read opinion.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals
July 8, 2004 - No. 01-99017 - Sanders v. Woodford
Court conditionally granted defendant's habeas petition because he was not given an individualized death sentence as required by the Eighth Amendment due to the district court's failure to properly weight mitigating and aggravating factors. Read opinion.

July 6, 2004 - No. 02-16786 - Shapiro v. Paradise Valley
In a case involving the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the court affirmed the exclusion of attorney's fees for work performed by plaintiff's attorney before he was admitted to practice pro hac vice in Arizona state court. Read opinion.