In Re Varbel
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZLAKET, Justice.
A hearing committee has determined that respondent is guilty of multiple ethical violations. The disciplinary commission agrees. Both have recommended disbarment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 53(e), Ariz.R.Sup.Ct.
Mr. and Mrs. R retained respondent to represent them in a landlord-tenant dispute. The ease went to trial in November 1988. It resulted in an $86,500 judgment in favor of respondent’s clients and a $2,500 judgment against them on a counterclaim. One month later, the attorney for the opposing parties made a written settlement offer of $18,000 to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re ShannonArizona Supreme Court · 1994
- In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, KerstingArizona Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. MeadorCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
- State v. TurnerArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, FresquezArizona Supreme Court · 1989
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. ViramontesArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- In Re PeasleyArizona Supreme Court · 2004
- In re CurtisArizona Supreme Court · 1995
- In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, BemisArizona Supreme Court · 1997
- Matter of MurphyArizona Supreme Court · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.