|Volume 8, No. 1||A Publication of the State Bar of Arizona - January 06, 2009|
Q: Do I have a duty to communicate with my criminal-defense client's family and friends?
A: No. Read Ethics Op. 07-01.
Disclaimer | About eLegal | Feedback
State Bar of Arizona
Reeling from soured loans originated during the peak of the housing market, regional and national banks are turning to asset consultants to salvage thousands of reclaimed properties throughout the Valley. Read more.
Spring 2009 Events Announced by the James E. Rogers College of Law
An impressive line-up of events, including a lecture by John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States, is open for registration. Read more.
Absolved by Firm, Ex-Holland & Knight Partner Faces Ethics Case re Timekeeping
After Matthew Farmer complained in 2005 that a fellow partner at Holland & Knight's Chicago office had allegedly added hours to a client's bill for work in a litigation matter that Farmer and others didn't actually perform, the law firm said Edward Ryan had done nothing wrong. Read more.
Online Subpoena Program Now Available
In-House Counsel Must Now Register With State Bar
Ethics Committee Releases Opinion Regarding File Retention
Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One | Division Two
December 23, 2008 - CV 08-0310 - Turken v. Gordon
Do city payments to the developer of a shopping center violate the Gift Clause of the Arizona Constitution? Read opinion.
December 31, 2008 - 2 CA-CR 2008-0035 - State of Arizona v. Steven Dwayne Szpyrka
Was the statement "I got nothin' to say" an unambiguous invocation of a suspect's Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, obliging the detective to cease questioning immediately? Read opinion.
9th Circuit Court of Appeals
December 31, 2008 - In the Matter of: Owens, No. 07-35634
Bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing debtor's bad-faith Chapter 11 case rather than converting it to Chapter 7. When deciding between dismissal and conversion under 11 U.S.C. section 1112(b), the court must consider the interests of all the creditors; here, the other creditors would fare worse under Chapter 7 because the accompanying discharge would deny them access to debtor's future income. Read opinion.
December 30, 2008 - Gonzalez v. Duncan, No. 06-56523
A sentence of 28 years to life imprisonment under California's "Three Strikes" law violates the Eighth Amendment where: 1) the offense was Petitioner's failure to update his annual sex offender registration within five working days of his birthday; and 2) he was living at his registered address throughout the relevant time period. Habeas relief is warranted because the state court's application of the gross disproportionality principle was objectively unreasonable. Read opinion.
The Complete Lawyer
Lawyer Jobs Available
Expert and Consultant Directory
AZ Supreme Court Opinions
In which format would you like to receive this eNewsletter in the future, plain text or text w/graphics? Check the appropriate box below:
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.