|Volume 8, No. 2||A Publication of the State Bar of Arizona - January 20, 2009|
Q: What content must my advertisements contain?
A: The name and office address of at least one lawyer or law firm responsible for the content. Read ER 7.2(c).
Disclaimer | About eLegal | Feedback
State Bar of Arizona
The U.S. Supreme Court has found an exception to the exclusionary rule for negligent police errors. Read more.
Court Rules that 'Metadata' Aren't Public Records
A divided Arizona appellate court ruled that hidden electronic data that indicates how and when documents are produced with word processing computer programs aren't themselves public records. Read more.
Arizona Courts Ordered to Find Cost Savings
Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor ordered all courts in Arizona to find ways to cut their budgets for state-funded justice programs in light of a potential $1.6 billion state budget shortfall. Read more.
State Bar Launches Online Subpoena Service
Membership Dues Must Be Paid Soon
Nominate a Colleague for Annual State Bar Awards
Arizona Securities Fraud Liability, 2nd Edition
State Bar of Arizona Seeks Chief Bar Counsel
Member Usage of Fastcase Continues to Increase
DNA Actual Innocence Grant
Arizona Court of Appeals
Division One | Division Two
Jan. 8, 2009 - CV 07-0558 - Barnett v. Jedynak
How is the community's interest in a home purchased prior to marriage calculated? Read opinion.
Dec. 31, 2008 - CV 2008-0109 - Williams v. Williams
1) When an award of costs, expenses, and attorney fees is requested pursuant to A.R.S. � 25-324(A), may a court consider the subjective intent of a party when determining the "reasonableness" of the positions the party has taken?
2) May a court disregard the financial resources of a party who seeks an award of costs, expenses, and attorney fees under A.R.S. � 25-324(A) and consider only the financial resources of the party who would be paying the fee award? Read opinion.
9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Jan. 13, 2009 - US v. McCaleb, No. 06-50387
Conviction and life sentence for drug-related offenses are affirmed where the district court did not: 1) plainly err in its jury instructions; 2) abuse its discretion by admitting certain expert-witness testimony; or 3) improperly rely on unproven prior convictions at sentencing. Read opinion.
Jan. 9, 2009 - U.S. v. Kaczynski, No. 06-10514
Order approving the plan developed to dispose of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski's personal property that was seized during the underlying criminal investigation into his bombings is affirmed where: 1) the restitution lien statute, 18 U.S.C. section 3613, is facially valid because it is not unconstitutional in all of its applications and is not overbroad; 2) the lien statute does not violate Kaczynski's First Amendment rights as applied; 3) the district court acted well within its discretion by ordering bomb-making materials not be returned to Kaczynski or his designee; and 4) allowing credit-bids on firearms and other personal property that do not sell at an internet auction did not violate the letter or spirit of an earlier Ninth Circuit decision in the case. 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.