Arizona Supreme Court· 6/21/1994

In Re Shannon

Citations

876 P.2d 548
179 Ariz. 52
167 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 41
1994 Ariz. LEXIS 65

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding an attorney violated his duty of candor to the tribunal by changing his client’s interrogatory answers without the client’s knowledge
opting for statutory interpretation that does not limit this court in interpreting range of sanctions it could impose on attorneys so as not to implicate constitutional concerns
finding lawyer who represented clients with conflicting interests did so for “selfish reasons”
“the determination of who shall practice law in Arizona and under what condition is a function placed by the state constitution in this court” (internal quotation marks omitted)
attorney’s failure to execute satisfaction of judgment before cashing check, resulting in motion to compel and five-month delay, was undue waste of court resources and prejudicial to administration of justice
attorney’s failure to execute satisfaction of judgment before cashing check, resulting in motion to compel and five-month delay, was undue waste of court resources and prejudicial to administration of justice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Corcoran, Zlaket, Moeller

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

52 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named In Re Shannon

24 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.