Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Matter of Neville, 708 P.2d 1297.

146 citing documents.

In Re: Mh2023-004502 Ariz. 2026
In Re: Mh2023-004502 Ariz. 2026
Co. v. Langerman L. Offs., P.A., ¶ 10 (2001) ().
Ashkenazi v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Ashkenazi v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶26 To support its claim, the Ashkenazi Group cites in which the supreme court analyzed the rule3 regulating a lawyer’s business relationship with his client and explained that the ethical bar to a financial transaction between lawyer and client, absent full disclosure and consent, protects a client who may otherwise 3 At that time, the predecessor to E.
In re Member of State Bar 244 P.3d 549 Ariz. 2010
In Re Phillips 244 P.3d 549 Ariz. 2010
In Re Phillips 244 P.3d 549 Ariz. 2010
In re Member of State Bar 244 P.3d 549 Ariz. 2010
In the Matter of Carly Van Dox Ariz. 2007
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
In the Matter of Carly Van Dox Ariz. 2007
In re Scholl, 200 Ariz. 222, 227, ¶ 29, ( and ).
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
State v. Roque 141 P.3d 368 Ariz. 2006
State v. Roque 141 P.3d 368 Ariz. 2006
¶75 This court has adopted the definition of “clear and convincing” that requires the jury to “be persuaded that the truth of the contention is ‘highly probable.’” (quoting MCCORMICK ON EVIDENCE § 340(b) (2d ed. 1972)).
In Re Peasley 90 P.3d 764 Ariz. 2004
In Re Peasley 90 P.3d 764 Ariz. 2004
¶64 As mentioned previously, “[t]he purposes of professional discipline are to protect the public, the legal profession, and the justice system, and to deter others from engaging in misconduct.” Horwitz, 180 Ariz. at 28-29, 881 P.2d at 360-61 ( and ).
Paradigm Insurance v. Langerman Law Offices, P.A. 24 P.3d 593 Ariz. 2001
Paradigm Insurance v. Langerman Law Offices, P.A. 24 P.3d 593 Ariz. 2001
As a practical matter, “an attorney is deemed to be dealing with a client when ‘it may fairly be said that because of other transactions an ordinary person would look to the lawyer as a protector rather than as an adversary.’ ” , ( , ).
In Re Scholl 25 P.3d 710 Ariz. 2001
In Re Scholl 25 P.3d 710 Ariz. 2001
Matter of Murphy 936 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1997
Matter of Murphy 936 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1997
(attorney must explain implications, advantages, and risks of common representation); , (full disclosure includes explanation of divergent interests and of need to seek independent legal advice).
Matter of Savoy 891 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1995
Matter of Savoy 891 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1995
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
DISCUSSION I. Standard of Review In disciplinary matters, this court acts as an independent “trier of both fact and law in the exercise of our supervisory responsibility over the State Bar.”
In re Retter 885 P.2d 1080 Ariz. 1994
In re Retter 885 P.2d 1080 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Arrick 882 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Arrick 882 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Horwitz 881 P.2d 352 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Horwitz 881 P.2d 352 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Higgins 884 P.2d 1094 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Higgins 884 P.2d 1094 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Hansen 877 P.2d 802 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Hansen 877 P.2d 802 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Struthers 877 P.2d 789 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Struthers 877 P.2d 789 Ariz. 1994
Swartz, 141 Ariz. at 277 , 686 P.2d at 1247 .
In Re Shannon 876 P.2d 548 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Kaplan 877 P.2d 274 Ariz. 1994
In Re Shannon 876 P.2d 548 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Kaplan 877 P.2d 274 Ariz. 1994
In Re Lorona 875 P.2d 795 Ariz. 1994
In Re Lorona 875 P.2d 795 Ariz. 1994
(citations omitted); , (“[M]ost of the issues of fact in the case were disputed by the parties; however, this did not deter the court from finding that the evidence ...
In re Rubenstein 875 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1994
In re Rubenstein 875 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Merrill 875 P.2d 128 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Merrill 875 P.2d 128 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Beren 874 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Beren 874 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1994