On March 23, 2017, the Arizona Supreme Court, in a rare split decision authored by Vice Chief Justice John Pelander, changed Arizona law with respect to a litigant’s right to recover its reasonable attorney's fees under a contractual fee-shifting provision. The recipient of a favorable judgment in Arizona is no longer inevitably deemed to be the prevailing party under a contractual fee-shifting provision. Now there are additional considerations that go into the mix.
Time runs against the King, at least when it comes to contract-based claims against construction companies in Arizona.
In a recent article, Jennifer Perkins, of counsel to our firm, writes about the challenges of managing client expectations in the face of long appellate timelines. She also explains some of the reasons why civil appeals take longer than most clients expect. Read her full article in Attorney at Law Magazine.
On Appellate Practice: Deciding Whether to Bring a Petition for Review--Attorney at Law Magazine--January 2014
In this month's edition of Attorney at Law Magazine, attorney Robert Mandel discusses the key factors to consider in deciding whether to file a petition for review to the Arizona Supreme Court. On Appellate Practice: Deciding Whether to Bring a Petition for Review.
In this month's edition of Attorney at Law Magazine, Robert Mandel addresses unconstitutionally excessive punitive damages awards. When is a Punitive Damages Award Too Big?
Rob Mandel's article in this month's edition of Attorney at Law Magazine addresses a common misconception regarding Rule 12(b) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. Legal Misconceptions: An Appellate Lawyer's Perspective on Conversion Under Rule 12 (b).
New Division One Decision Regarding the Marital Community's Interest in a Lawyer's Professional Goodwill.
Division One is out with an important family law decision, Walsh v. Walsh, which will be of particular interest to lawyers and other professionals in Arizona. The court of appeals held that the family court erred by employing a "realizable benefits" standard in determining the value of husband's professional goodwill as a practicing lawyer. The family court had rejected wife's argument for a "capitalization of earnings" approach as requiring the court to engage in "mere speculation."
Division One’s recent decision in Geller v. Lesk, --- P.3d --- 2012, 2012 WL 4364241 (App. Sept. 25, 2012), will be of interest not only to litigators but also to corporate counsel. It imposes limits on the enforcement of broadly drafted contractual fee-shifting provisions — and, for the first time in the context of provisions that contain no express reasonableness limitation, shifts the burden to the applicant to prove the “reasonableness” of the fees.
Our friends at AZAPP have a good post about Fields v. Oates -- the latest in a long line of opinions out of our appellate courts to address appellate jurisdiction and the final judgment rule. Surprisingly, securing appellate jurisdiction has become one of the trickier issues for Arizona practitioners.
More to come from us on this issue shortly.
For Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals, Tuesdays and Thursdays are decision days -- the days when the court releases opinions and memorandum decisions. Accordingly, each Tuesday and Thursday morning, many Arizona appellate lawyers go to the court's website to see which new decisions have come out...