 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| In re Clark, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0017-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 13, 2002, Decided , February 13, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney, who either directly or de facto, represented a client and the tenants of that client without discussing the potential conflict of interest that existed between them was censured and ordered to pay costs.
|
|||||
| In re Davidon, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0015-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 13, 2002, Decided , February 13, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: County prosecutor was censured for failure to comply with request by public defender to forward any and all criminal records that related to the victims and/or witnesses in trial, including disclosure of all prior felony convictions of witnesses.
|
|||||
| In re Kirkland, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0018-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 13, 2002, Decided , February 13, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was censured for failing to follow appropriate trust account guidelines and negligently violating duties owed to clients and the legal system by falsely representing status of his business and ability to operate under trade name.
|
|||||
| State v. Canez, Supreme Court No. CR 98-0488-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 14, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where five of seven Hispanic jury pool members were challenged in Hispanic defendant's murder trial, judge found that fact met defendant's burden of establishing prima facie case of discrimination and state had to give reasons for strikes.
|
|||||
| State v. Wilkinson, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-00-0365-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 14, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Victims of defendant who represented himself to be a licensed contractor were entitled to restitution for those damages that flowed directly from defendant's criminal conduct, without the intervention of additional causative factors.
|
|||||
| In re Klahr, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-02-0008-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 15, 2002, Decided , February 15, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McDonald v. Thomas, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-01-0001-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 19, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attestation statute contemplated only the governor act to reject recommendation of clemency by clemency board; where governor's letter denying clemency did not contain sufficient indicia of authenticity, it was not required act of governor.
|
|||||
| Romley v. Arpaio, 1 CA-CV 01-0013,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, February 19, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A county sheriff did not have the authority to direct an administrative employee, who was also an attorney, to represent the sheriff in proceedings before the employee merit system commission brought by a terminated employee.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
