|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
Arizona - October 29 - October 31, 2002
|
| |
Demarce v. Willrich, 1 CA-SA 02-0208,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, October 29, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a sexual abuse case, defendant, who was sentenced according to a plea agreement that included lifetime probation, did not have a right to then reject the lifetime probation and, in its place, elect incarceration for a lesser term.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
In re Axford, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0115-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, October 31, 2002, Decided , October 31, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Attorney, who had been suspended for six months for failing to comply with mandatory continuing legal education requirements, was suspended for another year for practicing while suspended and ordered to undergo an independent medical evaluation.
|
|
| |
|
| |
In re Griffiths, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0114-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, October 31, 2002, Decided , October 31, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Attorney, who failed to appear at court hearings and to inform her client about it, was suspended from the practice of law for six months and one day; a suspension was not inconsistent with prior disciplines.
|
|
| |
In re McAlister, Supreme Court No. SB-02-0123-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, October 31, 2002, Decided , October 31, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Attorney, who suffered from bipolar disorder, was suspended from the practice of law; although attorney's conduct warranted disbarment, mitigating factors reduced the appropriate sanction to the agreed upon six months and one day suspension.
|
|
| |
In re Piatt, Arizona Supreme Court No. SB-02-0107-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, October 31, 2002, Decided , October 31, 2002, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Suspended attorney was disbarred, where, inter alia, because of prior discipline, he clearly was on notice that his sexual misconduct, which involved exploitation, extortion, and the practice of meeting with clients in his home was inappropriate.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
