client hearing (Arizona) · Go Syfert
← Arizona issues

client hearing in Arizona

7 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2012 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Griswoldgreen
ariz · 1969 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012AR.S. § 32-2085 (West 2012); see also State v. Sucharew, 205 Ariz. 16, 21, ¶ 10 , 66 P.3d 59, 64 (App.2003) (attorney-client privilege “belongs to the client”). 3 Put differently, the privilege is “personal to the client.” State v. Griswold, 105 Ariz. 1, 5 , 457 P.2d 331, 335 (1969).

2012AR.S. § 32-2085 (West 2012); see also State v. Sucharew, 205 Ariz. 16, 21, ¶ 10 , 66 P.3d 59, 64 (App.2003) (attorney-client privilege “belongs to the client”). 3 Put differently, the privilege is “personal to the client.” State v. Griswold, 105 Ariz. 1, 5 , 457 P.2d 331, 335 (1969).

11
State v. Sucharewgreen
arizctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012AR.S. § 32-2085 (West 2012); see also State v. Sucharew, 205 Ariz. 16, 21, ¶ 10 , 66 P.3d 59, 64 (App.2003) (attorney-client privilege “belongs to the client”). 3 Put differently, the privilege is “personal to the client.” State v. Griswold, 105 Ariz. 1, 5 , 457 P.2d 331, 335 (1969).

2012AR.S. § 32-2085 (West 2012); see also State v. Sucharew, 205 Ariz. 16, 21, ¶ 10 , 66 P.3d 59, 64 (App.2003) (attorney-client privilege “belongs to the client”). 3 Put differently, the privilege is “personal to the client.” State v. Griswold, 105 Ariz. 1, 5 , 457 P.2d 331, 335 (1969).

11
In Re the Rules of Professional Conductgreen
mont · 2000 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
2 sentences

2001Co. v. Bell, 438 Mich. 512 , 475 N.W.2d 294, 297 (1991) (“the relationship between the insurer and the retained defense counsel ... [is] less than a client-attorney relationship”); In re Rules of Professional Conduct, 299 Mont. 321 , 2 P.3d 806 , 814 ¶ 38 (2000) (“We hold that under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the insured is the sole client of defense counsel.”).

2001Co. v. Bell, 438 Mich. 512 , 475 N.W.2d 294, 297 (1991) (“the relationship between the insurer and the retained defense counsel ... [is] less than a client-attorney relationship”); In re Rules of Professional Conduct, 299 Mont. 321 , 2 P.3d 806 , 814 ¶ 38 (2000) (“We hold that under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the insured is the sole client of defense counsel.”).

11
Atlanta International Insurance v. Bellgreen
mich · 1991 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
2 sentences

2001Co. v. Bell, 438 Mich. 512 , 475 N.W.2d 294, 297 (1991) (“the relationship between the insurer and the retained defense counsel ... [is] less than a client-attorney relationship”); In re Rules of Professional Conduct, 299 Mont. 321 , 2 P.3d 806 , 814 ¶ 38 (2000) (“We hold that under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the insured is the sole client of defense counsel.”).

2001Co. v. Bell, 438 Mich. 512 , 475 N.W.2d 294, 297 (1991) (“the relationship between the insurer and the retained defense counsel ... [is] less than a client-attorney relationship”); In re Rules of Professional Conduct, 299 Mont. 321 , 2 P.3d 806 , 814 ¶ 38 (2000) (“We hold that under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the insured is the sole client of defense counsel.”).

11
Matter of Wolframgreen
ariz · 1993 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995
2 sentences

1995In re Wolfram, 174 Ariz. 49, 53 , 847 P.2d 94, 98 (1993).

1995In re Wolfram, 174 Ariz. 49, 53 , 847 P.2d 94, 98 (1993).

11
Twohy v. State Bargreen
cal · 1989 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Miles green
arizctapp · 2005
1 sentence

2012Id. ¶ 8 A psychologist’s client holds the privilege.

12012–2012
State v. Jones green
ariz · 1996
2 sentences

2003The motion was filed because the State disclosed as a potential witness a former client of defense counsel for Jones. 185 Ariz. at 482 , 917 P.2d at 211 .

2003The motion was filed because the State disclosed as a potential witness a former client of defense counsel for Jones. 185 Ariz. at 482 , 917 P.2d at 211 .

12003–2003
Committee on Professional Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass'n v. McCullough green
iowa · 1991
1 sentence

1991In Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. McCullough, 468 N.W.2d 458 (Iowa 1991), the Iowa Supreme Court held that taking a contractual security interest to secure payment of attorney’s fees does not constitute entering into a business transaction with a client in violation of DR 5-104(A).

11991–1991
People v. Young green
colo · 1987
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal.Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo.1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind.1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting coca

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
Matter of Moore green
ind · 1983
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal.Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo.1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind.1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting coca

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
Committee on Professional Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass'n v. Shuminsky green
iowa · 1984
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal.Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo.1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind.1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting coca

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
Matter of Payne green
ind · 1986
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal.Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo.1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind.1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting coca

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
In the Matter of Bosserman green
sc · 1989
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Orosz green
ohio · 1983
2 sentences

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

1990See, e.g., Twohy v. State Bar of California, 48 Cal.3d 502 , 256 Cal. Rptr. 794 , 769 P.2d 976 (1989) (attorney, a cocaine addict, twice suspended before, who failed to comply with the orders of the court and who practiced law unlawfully, is disbarred); People v. Young, 732 P.2d 1208 (Colo. 1987) (citing the ABA Standards Rule 5.11, court disbarred an attorney who engaged in the use of cocaine and was convicted of using communication facility to distribute cocaine); Matter of Payne, 494 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. 1986) (possession of cocaine, failure to appear for a client at a hearing, and accepting c

11990–1990
Tidwell v. Riggs green
ariz · 1950
2 sentences

1956In Tidwell v. Riggs, 70 Ariz. 417 , 222 P. 2d 795 , Justice Udall, in writing the opinion for the court set out haec verba the assignments of error therein presented (very similar to the assignments in the instant case)' and the provisions of Rule 10 and painstakingly informed the Bar what would be the result of failure to comply with the rule.

1956In Tidwell v. Riggs, 70 Ariz. 417 , 222 P. 2d 795 , Justice Udall, in writing the opinion for the court set out haec verba the assignments of error therein presented (very similar to the assignments in the instant case)' and the provisions of Rule 10 and painstakingly informed the Bar what would be the result of failure to comply with the rule.

11956–1956

Where else courts name it

TX 32 (1913–2024) CA 30 (1962–2024) NY 17 (1992–2024) PA 15 (1983–2024) IL 15 (1934–2026) IA 13 (1933–2022) WI 12 (1979–2025) OR 12 (1985–2026) SD 12 (1961–2026) NJ 12 (1981–2024) DC 11 (1997–2024) OH 11 (1999–2021) CO 11 (1912–2023) MD 10 (1983–2016) LA 10 (1984–2017) FL 9 (1978–2019) WA 9 (1990–2020) WV 8 (1994–2015) KY 8 (1987–2020) MI 8 (1971–2019) NM 7 (1994–2026) AZ 7 (1956–2012) MA 7 (1985–2024) GA 6 (2011–2026) IN 6 (1976–2003) NE 6 (1987–2015) AL 5 (1992–2024) CT 5 (1960–2013) ME 5 (1999–2023) UT 4 (1988–2023) AR 4 (1996–2022) DE 4 (1990–2017) MO 4 (1955–2006) NC 4 (2008–2023) ID 4 (1993–2015) MN 4 (1994–2014) MS 4 (1962–2023) KS 4 (1995–2024) VT 4 (2006–2023) MT 3 (1982–2009) SC 3 (1997–2009) NV 3 (1909–2016) AK 2 (1982–1995) OK 2 (1967–1970)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check