The Arizona Supreme Court issued its latest in a series of Orders governing judicial proceedings impacted by COVID 19. On November 10, 2021, Chief Justice Robert Brutinel signed Administrative Order 2021-072. This new order replaces Order 2021-109...
Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog
COVID Litigation Update
In recent weeks, there have been developments in COVID related litigation both around the country and in Arizona.
Arizona Public Records Law -- Requesting Public Records
In 1864, President Abraham Lincoln closed the most famous political speech in American history by describing our nation's rebirth as a "government of the people, by the people, for the people." That fervent pledge of people's rule in the Gettysburg Address is at the heart of public records law w...
Do I Have a Case? Part II: The Second Element of Case Evaluation
Though the evaluation of every case is unique, three primary elements come into play in almost every single one. In Part I of this series, I discussed the first element: liability. To have a case, the wrongdoers actions have to be considered unreasonable and unacceptable by society and law. If l...
URGING SHERIFF TO ISSUE CITATIONS AND A PROSECUTOR TO PROSECUTE THOSE CITATIONS FOR A LEGITIMATE PURPOSE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ABUSE OF PROCESS
Torts: Abuse of Process Fappani v. Bratton, 778 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 8 (App. Div. I, November 16, 2017) (J. Brown) Plaintiff built a private dirt motorbike track on his property for use by his children. Defendant successfully urged the Maricopa County Sheriff to issue two citations for excessive no...
Evidence—Partial or Cropped Video Inadmissible
State v. Steinle, 717 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 27 (App. Div. I, July 23, 2015) (J. Orozco) CROPPED OR EDITED VIDEO INADMISSIBLE IN VIOLATION OF RULE OF COMPLETENESS—FAILURE TO SHOW WHOLE STORY Defendant was charged with first degree murder. The prosecution attempted to introduce into evidence a cell pho...
What's Your Favorite Legal Movie? Part III
To recap -- Dev Sethi -- Murder on a Sunday Morning Matt Schmidt -- 12 Angry Men Today, Jim Campbell weighs in with his thoughts: My favorite law movie is Twelve Angry Men. It shows us the deliberations of 12 men deciding the fate of a young man accused of robbery and murder. It takes place ...
What is Your Favorite Legal Movie? Part II
Over the next few weeks, we all weigh in on our favorite movies. Here is Matt Schmidt's favorite: 12 Angry Men (1957) I think there is a place in everyone's heart for My Cousin Vinny, but 12 Angry Men is a true black and white classic that is preserved in the National Film Registry by the Libra...
What's Your Favorite Legal Movie?
Dev Sethi talks about his favorite legal movie, Murder on a Sunday Morning.
Important U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
The Gist: Thirteen parents attempted to enroll their twenty black children into white schools that were located closer to their homes. The Board of Education of Topeka rejected every request and instead referred each child to a segregated school. After 58 years of of stating segregation was const...
Torts—Legal Malpractice—Accrual Statute of Limitations—Failure to Name or Join Party
Hayenga v. Gilbert, 706 Ariz. Adv. Rep 10 (App. Div. I, February 12, 2015) (J. Swann ) LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS THAT OCCUR “IN THE COURSE OF” LITIGATION DO NOT ACCRUE UNTIL LITIGATION FINALLY RESOLVED—FAILURE TO NAME/JOIN PARTY AND DISCOVER DEFENSE Plaintiff purchased real estate from Gosnell...
Important U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Gang Lum v. Rice (1927)
The Gist: A Chinese-American student in Mississippi was not allowed to attend a white-only school because of her descent, even though there were no schools in the district available for the Chinese. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the school could nevertheless preclude her. The Details: Martha Lum...
Important U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Berea College v. Kentucky (1908)
The Gist: A college in Kentucky admitted both black and white students without discrimination. The Kentucky government passed a law prohibiting the teaching of black and white students at the same school. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law. The Details: Berea College was a private school char...
Important U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Cumming V. Richmond County Board of Education (1899)
The Gist: The only high schools available in Richmond County were for white students only. Plaintiffs brought this suit against the County to stop government funding to the white-only high schools, arguing such funding violated the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, they argu...
Important U.S. Supreme Court Decisions: Dredd Scott v. Sandford (1857)
The Gist: A slave was taken by his owner to Illinois, a free state. When the owner died, the slave sued the owner's estate administrator, claiming the slave's residence in a free state made him a free man. The Supreme Court held that slaves were property not citizens, and because they were not ci...
Arizona Law: Courts rule on OJ's, liens, insurance coverage, deadlines and inappropriate communication
Since my last blog on Arizona law, there have been five new decisions from the Arizona Supreme Court and Arizona Appellate Court that have an impact on our personal injury law practice. Though most will not make you jump out of your seat with excitement, it is still important for lawyers to rema...
How Can the NBA Force Don Sterling to Sell his Team?
Dev Sethi discusses the legal implications of the NBA's action in response to Donald Sterling's racist rant.
Civility Matters
Dev Sethi teaches a national course on the importance of civility in litigation. The seminar was co-sponsored by the State Bar of Arizona and the American Board of Trial Advocates.
Arizona Supreme Court Deems H.B. 2600 Unconstitutional
At Kinerk, Schmidt & Sethi, PLLC, our attorneys are devoted to securing our clients' futures by helping them receive maximum compensation in their injury claims, but our passion goes beyond the scope of our Tucson practice as we are equally devoted to the Arizona Constitution and the pursuit ...