Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Pappas, 768 P.2d 1161.

136 citing documents.

Lund v. Myers 286 P.3d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Lund v. Myers 286 P.3d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
See, e.g., Samaritan Found, v. Goodfarb, , (“The privilege is intended to encourage the client in need of legal advice to tell the lawyer the truth” and is therefore “central to the delivery of legal services in this country.”); , 522-23 n. 11, -68 (1988) (stating that the attoxmey-client privilege exists, in part, to “foster the public’s confidence in the legal profession”); , (“The purpose of the attorney-client privilege is to encourage a client to confide
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
at 224, ¶ 8, 25 P.3d at 712 ( ).
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
at 224, ¶ 8, , 25 P.3d at 712 ( , ).
Romley v. Arpaio 40 P.3d 831 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Romley v. Arpaio 40 P.3d 831 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
4 A lawyer takes his or her license along when engaging in any type of activity, -22 , -67 (1988), and does not have the luxury of shedding professional accountability at whim.
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
In Re a Member of the State Bar 951 P.2d 889 Ariz. 1998
Matter of Murphy 936 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1997
Matter of Murphy 936 P.2d 1269 Ariz. 1997
(“[interests need not be antagonistic, such as between buyer and seller____ [Those] of a general and limited partner always differ or diverge.”).
Matter of Brown 910 P.2d 631 Ariz. 1996
Matter of Brown 910 P.2d 631 Ariz. 1996
See Standards 9.22, 9.32; , (“Failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities is a significant aggravating factor.”).
Matter of Owens 893 P.2d 1284 Ariz. 1995
Matter of Owens 893 P.2d 1284 Ariz. 1995
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
In re Gamble 882 P.2d 1271 Ariz. 1994
In re Gamble 882 P.2d 1271 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Horwitz 881 P.2d 352 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Horwitz 881 P.2d 352 Ariz. 1994
("Failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities is a significant aggravating factor.”).
In re Manning 881 P.2d 1150 Ariz. 1994
In re Manning 881 P.2d 1150 Ariz. 1994
In re Riches 877 P.2d 785 Ariz. 1994
In re Riches 877 P.2d 785 Ariz. 1994
In Re Shannon 876 P.2d 548 Ariz. 1994
In Re Shannon 876 P.2d 548 Ariz. 1994
citing Neville, 147 Ariz. at 108 , 708 P.2d at 1299 .
Matter of Beren 874 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Beren 874 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1994
In Re Bowen III 872 P.2d 1235 Ariz. 1994
In Re Bowen III 872 P.2d 1235 Ariz. 1994
In Re Giles 871 P.2d 693 Ariz. 1994
In Re Giles 871 P.2d 693 Ariz. 1994
In Re Augenstein 871 P.2d 254 Ariz. 1994
In Re Augenstein 871 P.2d 254 Ariz. 1994
citing Neville, 147 Ariz. at 108 , 708 P.2d at 1299 .
Matter of Gawlowski 868 P.2d 324 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Gawlowski 868 P.2d 324 Ariz. 1994
In Re Elowitz 866 P.2d 1326 Ariz. 1994
In re Member of the State Bar 866 P.2d 1326 Ariz. 1994
In re Member of the State Bar 866 P.2d 1326 Ariz. 1994
citing Neville, 147 Ariz. at 108 , 708 P.2d at 1299 .
In Re Elowitz 866 P.2d 1326 Ariz. 1994
citing Neville, 147 Ariz. at 108 , 708 P.2d at 1299 .
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona Redondo 861 P.2d 619 Ariz. 1993