ggraham
Posts:
19 Apr 2006 05:30 PM |
|
R-05-0034 PETITION TO AMEND RULES 32 (c), 45 AND 64 (f), ARIZONA RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT MODIFY THE DUES STRUCTURE RELATING TO MEMBERS OVER 70 AND RETIRED MEMBERS; MODIFICATIONS TO RULES GOVERNING MEMBERSHIP, MCLE AND REINSTATEMENT Petitioner: Robert B. Van Wyck, Chief Bar Counsel, State Bar of Arizona 4201 North 24th Street, Suite 200 Phoenix, AZ 85016-6288 (602) 252-4804 Bar No. 007800 Filed December 7, 2005 COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED AS OF MAY 22, 2006. ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 2006-83 TO AMEND RULES 32(c), 45 and 64(f), RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 21, 2006.
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:40 PM |
|
Recommended changes in fee schedule for lawyers over 70 years of age [Wm. M. Waldrom, Pro Se]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:41 PM |
|
Proposed Changes in Bar Dues and MCLE [Michael L. Rubin, Pro Se]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:43 PM |
|
Comment on Proposed Changes to Rule 45 [Michelle Paz Soldan, Eyphemia Stamos Theodore, Alice Casey, Pro Se]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:44 PM |
|
Re: Petition to Amend State Bar Rules on Membership Catergories - Over 70 and Retired [Felecia F. Stitcher]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:45 PM |
|
Re: State Bar of Arizona Membership Categories - Over 70 years old [Joseph V Moschetti]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:46 PM |
|
Re: Petition to Amend Rules 32(c) and 64(f), Rules of the Supreme Court Petition Number R-05-0034 [Patrick E. Eldridge]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:48 PM |
|
Re: Opposition to Petition # R-05-0034 (State Bar of Arizona) [Myles C. Stewart]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:49 PM |
|
Re: Proposed Changes in Rules Relating to Senior State Bar Members [Frank E. Dickey, Jr.]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:50 PM |
|
Comment on Proposed Changes to Rules 32(c), 45 and 64(f); R-05-0034 [David D. Dodge]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:51 PM |
|
Re: Proposed Amendments to Rules 32, 45, and 64; Comments on [Richard E. Norling]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
20 Apr 2006 12:52 PM |
|
Re: State Bar Petition to Amend Rules 32(c), 45 and 64(f), Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court [James D. V. Stevenson]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
02 May 2006 04:04 PM |
|
[Comments] Re: Petition R-05-0034 - Comments [Senior Lawyers of Arizona - Tucson by Joana Diamos] [for 23 members]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
02 May 2006 04:05 PM |
|
[Comments] Re: Proposal R-05-0034 [Gary B. Larson, Guy M. Buckley, Ronald G. Compton, Jr.]
|
|
|
|
ggraham
Posts:
02 May 2006 04:06 PM |
|
[Comments] Re: Petition R-05-0034 Comments [W. Edward Morgan]
|
|
|
|
ecrowley
Posts:
12 May 2006 05:26 PM |
|
[Comments] Re: Petition R-05-0034 [Regula Case] [Filed May 4, 2006]
|
|
|
|
FMigray
Posts:
15 May 2006 09:36 AM |
|
Attached comment is in opposition to proposed amendment to Rule 45. Commenter’s Name: Frank L. Migray Mailing Address: 717 W. Palm Lane Phoenix, AZ 85007 Phone Number: 602-258-5225 602-510-8726 (Cell) E-mail Address: [email protected] Bar Number: 003441 (Inactive)
|
|
|
|
ecrowley
Posts:
17 May 2006 06:30 PM |
|
[Comment] [James C. Mitchell]
|
|
|
|
lorosco
Posts:
18 May 2006 10:41 AM |
|
[Motion and Request] [Frank Lewis, Begam, Lewis & Marks]
|
|
|
|
lorosco
Posts:
18 May 2006 05:49 PM |
|
Judy Jacobi, Esq. 1441 E. Edison Street Tucson, AZ 85719 Bar No. 012498 May 18, 2006 Honorable Arizona Supreme Court Justices 1501 W. Washington Street, 4th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85007-3329 RE: Comment on Petition to Amend Rules 32(c), 45, and 64(f), ARIZONA RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT Dear Honorable Arizona Supreme Court Justices: After considering proposed changes to State Bar of Arizona membership requirements, I urge the Arizona Supreme Court to reject proposed dues changes to the “Inactive” category. The additional requirement to complete current year MCLE plus up to two additional years preceding activation is sensible since inactive members are literally out of practice. My objection is to the proposed requirement to pay differences in dues for the current year plus the difference in dues for up to two years immediately preceding reactivation. An attorney may be inactive for many reasons including illness, family/personal crisis, and difficulty finding employment. These individuals are likely experiencing financial strain attendant to the reason for their inactive status. While some inactive attorneys may have another profession or are otherwise monetarily stable, less fortunate attorneys should not be further financially burdened by paying additional dues for up to two years preceding reactivation. Unlike the proposed additional MCLE requirement, charging back dues for a lawyer who was not in practice defies reason. Paying current dues plus the cost of up to two years back MCLE is challenging enough for anyone out of work. The bar should not penalize these lawyers. Judy Jacobi Inactive Arizona Attorney
|
|
|
|