Search 

Azcourts.gov

Arizona Judicial Branch



FAQ

Register       Login

ATTENTION: This site has been recently moved. If you had an account on our old forum site, you will have to register a new account here in order to be able to post replies.

 

NEW! The Court acted on many pending rule petitions at its August 29, 2017 Rules Agenda.  

Click on the Amendments from Recent Rules Agendas link below to go directly to the amendments and orders for each one.

Message from the Chief Justice

Current Arizona Rules 

Amendments from Recent Rule Agendas

Rule Amendments (2006 to present) 

Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence


Pending Rules List

         Proposed Local Rules
                 Welcome!
This website allows you to electronically file and monitor court rule petitions and comments and to view existing rules of court, recent amendments of those rules, and pending rule petitions and comments. Any visitor to this site may view posts on this website, but to post a petition or comment you must register and log in. To view instructions on how to register and how to file a petition or comment, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page. 
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 20 May 2015 02:51 PM by  dhamra
R-15-0019 Petition to Amend Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure
 3 Replies
Sort:
Topic is locked
Author Messages
Tberg
Posts:

--
09 Jan 2015 04:01 PM
    R-15-0019

    PETITION TO AMEND ARIZONA RULES OF FAMILY LAW PROCEDURE

    Would add new Rule 67.1 to implement the Uniform Collaborative Law Rules, a voluntary, client-driven form of alternative dispute
    resolution

    Petitioner:
    Timothy Berg
    Uniform Law Commission
    2394 E. Camelback Road
    Suite 600
    Phoenix, AZ 85016
    602-916-5421
    602-916-5621
    Bar No. 004170

    Filed on January 9, 2015.

    Comments due on or before May 20, 2015.

    ADOPTED as modified, effective January 1, 2016.
    Attachments
    Rhersch
    Posts:

    --
    15 May 2015 12:36 PM
    Robert Michael Hersch
    333 N. Wilmot Road, Suite 340
    Tucson, Arizona 85711
    (520) 325-1515
    rhersch@icloud.com
    State Bar number 7929


    I am an attorney and have been practicing collaborative law since being trained in 2001 in Phoenix. We have a practice group in Tucson called the Collaborative Law Group of Southern Arizona made up of attorneys, financial specialist and divorce coaches. We have handled many, many cases to successful conclusion over the years and fully support the proposed Rule.

    jmoshier
    Posts:

    --
    19 May 2015 06:48 PM
    Jennifer Moshier
    3001 E. Camelback Rd., Ste. 130
    Phoenix, AZ 85016
    jennifer@azcalaw.com


    I am overwhelmingly in favor of this. I am a practitioner in both Arizona and California. Collaborative law holds more popularity in California because of its accessibility. My clients living in California are usually aware of the option. Many people in Arizona are not aware of this option. Without uniformity, attorneys may not suggest this option to clients for a number of reasons. Society benefits from an informed consumer. To adopt the rule serves the public, because lawyers who advise clients would begin to be on notice of this option since it is a part of the rules. Lawyers would be more likely to have some burden of advising their prospective and current clients about this option. This would increase the numbers of lawyers who train to practice as collaborative lawyers. It also fosters more goodwill among attorneys. This would in turn would provide more available options for parties seeking to use this process. The process reduces the burdens on the courts, reduces the expenses of the parties and likely reduces overall legal fees. My view is that the reduced expense of the process will increase the public confidence in attorneys and make legal representation more accessible to the public because the fees are not so overwhelming. To advance the legal profession by increasing public confidence means more people will retain attorneys because there is greater trust in lawyers.

    I have represented a number of clients in this process and their satisfaction level is high, even in very complex cases. I have also had a number of opposing parties reject the process, and this is nearly always when the opposing party has retained counsel who cannot practice collaborative law. To adopt the rules streamlines current processes and provides a clearer framework while also making it more likely that more attorneys will provide this valuable service.
    dhamra
    Posts:

    --
    20 May 2015 02:51 PM
    David Hamra
    2482 E. River Rd.
    Tucson, AZ 85718
    (520)615-2779
    dave@gordianadvisors.com

    I am not an attorney but a financial planner, and I can confirm that the collaborative process is extremely helpful in resolving financial as well as legal issues. Rather than subtly posturing on behalf of one client, in a collaborative case we have an open, interactive discussion on financial resources and challenges. We have much more opportunity to be creative in ensuring each party receives a fair financial settlement. The financial professional's role in collaborative divorce is to be completely neutral, conduct financial analysis and serve as a resource for both parties. As a result, each party is better informed and better equipped to reach settlement and can leave the marriage knowing that each of the couple has received similar, objective information and analysis.
    Topic is locked