Register       Login

YOUR HELP NEEDED: If you find a cross-reference that does not match the rule or subsection it refers to or any apparent clerical errors, please let us know by sending a precise description to [email protected].

Message from the Chief Justice

Current Arizona Rules on Westlaw


Amendments from Recent Rule Agendas

Rule Amendments (2006 to present) 


Proposed Local Rules





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. 


Contact Information

Please include all of your contact information when submitting a rule petition or comment.  Otherwise, your submission may be rejected and we will be unable to advise you as to why. 

PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 03 Apr 2024 11:09 AM by  Jennifer Moshier
R-23-0047 Petition to Amend Rule 67.1 of the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure
 1 Replies
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
New Member
Posts:2 New Member

18 Oct 2023 02:10 PM
    Candace J. Mitchell, L.P., Bar No. 500033
    Veritas Family Law, LLC
    6314 W. Union Hills Drive, Suite 200
    Glendale, AZ 85308
    [email protected]

    Would amend Rule 67.1 to the Rules of Family Law Procedure to allow Arizona Legal Paraprofessionals the abilty to represent clients in a collaborative law process pursuant to ACJA 7-210.

    Filed: October 18, 2023

    Would amend Rule 67.1 of the Rules of Family Law Procedure to allow Arizona Legal Paraprofessionals licensed under ACJA 7-210 to represent clients in a collaborative law process.

    Comments must be submitted by no later than Wednesday, May 1, 2024, and any reply by a petitioner must be submitted no later than Monday, June 3, 2024.
    Jennifer Moshier
    New Member
    Posts:1 New Member

    03 Apr 2024 11:09 AM
    I have been practicing collaborative law for 13, nearly 14 years. I don't know if I have had more cases than other lawyers, but I don't know many people who have been as invested as I have in this amazing legal choice (for both lawyers and clients).

    When I started : I had finished 3 years of law school, a 24 hour training, practiced from 2000 until 2011 in large law firms, started my own law firm - and nothing prepared me for the complexity that is collaborative process. What I read is that the proposed rule change would allow paraprofessionals, with none of my own training or education, to essentially join me at the table. Here is the problem with that read: The stakes must be equal between professionals for collaborative cases to work. The clients and public would be dramatically misled about what collaboration even is, let alone its chances of success, if they believe that just any person with a license can use collaborative process. Collaboration works when both people are represented by attorneys because both lawyers have litigation experience they can share with both clients. Both lawyers won't risk their license to return to court if collaboration fails. Both lawyers would face the same potential discipline process - and loss after similar investment into their professionals. This encourages attorneys to engage in a way that equalizes the situation on all sides. There are some lawyers I won't work with in collaborative process for these criteria. What happens in this situation when a paraprofessional and a lawyer oppose, and the case fails? The clients don't lose the same thing. One person has invested considerably less, so they have less invested in this valuable process. The paraprofessional can/ cannot(?) return to court. It doesn't matter because at that point, starting over isn't a problem for the person who has only paid a paraprofessional. Starting over is a bigger challenge for the person with the lawyer. Therefore, the investment is not equal and the process doesn't work. I would not take a case with some lawyers, and I helped pass Rule 67.1 to make collaborative process available to everyone in Arizona through lawyers without being trained, and to increase access to a lower cost, better option for justice. Sometimes I wonder if I went too far. Even lawyers get it wrong with this rule. Clients want and deserve accessibility and accountability.

    Jennifer K. Moshier, Founder
    Moshier Law
    11260 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 143
    Phoenix, Arizona 85018
    602-345-0455 (mobile)
    480-999-0800 (office)
    [email protected]

    You are not authorized to post a reply.