Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Matter of Spear, 774 P.2d 1335.

33 citing documents.

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
see also In re Spear, 160 Ariz. 545, 555-56, -46 (1989) (finding a dishonest or selfish motive because respondent “intentional[ly] abuse[d] .
In Re Non-Member of State Bar, Van Dox 152 P.3d 1183 Ariz. 2007
-56 , -46 (1989) (finding a dishonest or selfish motive because respondent “intentional[ly] abuse[d] ...
In Re Scholl 25 P.3d 710 Ariz. 2001
In Re Scholl 25 P.3d 710 Ariz. 2001
In Re Estate of Fogleman 3 P.3d 1172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. v. Fegen 3 P.3d 1172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In Re Estate of Fogleman 3 P.3d 1172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. v. Fegen 3 P.3d 1172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
In Re a Member of the State Bar 951 P.2d 889 Ariz. 1998
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
In re Davis 889 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
Matter of Arrick 882 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Arrick 882 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Higgins 884 P.2d 1094 Ariz. 1994
Matter of Higgins 884 P.2d 1094 Ariz. 1994
(deference proper on issues of credibility).
In re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Brooks 854 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
In re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Brooks 854 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
In re Ziman 847 P.2d 106 Ariz. 1993
In re Ziman 847 P.2d 106 Ariz. 1993
In re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Clemmens 838 P.2d 1262 Ariz. 1992
In re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Clemmens 838 P.2d 1262 Ariz. 1992
In re Sadacca 836 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1992
In re Sadacca 836 P.2d 386 Ariz. 1992
Matter of Breen 830 P.2d 462 Ariz. 1992
Matter of Breen 830 P.2d 462 Ariz. 1992
Matter of Rivkind 791 P.2d 1037 Ariz. 1990
Matter of Rivkind 791 P.2d 1037 Ariz. 1990
See, , (standards provide a useful framework for guiding our sanction decision).
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Nefstead 789 P.2d 385 Ariz. 1990
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Nefstead 789 P.2d 385 Ariz. 1990
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Fresquez 783 P.2d 774 Ariz. 1989
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Fresquez 783 P.2d 774 Ariz. 1989
We do not believe the Commission erred by refusing to consider the proffered recantation, which, it stated, “is not deemed newly discovered evidence.” , (Commission did not err by refusing to admit affidavit not offered at committee hearing; on review, court found the affidavit possessed little, if any, probative value).