Arizona State Bar Discipline Attorney

If you have been contacted by the State Bar of Arizona, received notice of a bar charge, or learned that your professional conduct is under investigation, you may be concerned about your license, reputation, and livelihood. 

A bar charge does not mean that professional misconduct occurred or that discipline is inevitable. Many matters are dismissed during intake or after investigation. Others may be resolved through confidential diversion, an admonition, probation, or a negotiated consent agreement. 

At Lavy Law, we represent Arizona attorneys during State Bar intake inquiries, screening investigations, Attorney Discipline Probable Cause Committee review, settlement negotiations, formal disciplinary proceedings, and appeals to the Arizona Supreme Court. We work to resolve allegations as early as possible while protecting the professional record you have spent years building. 

What Is Professional Misconduct for an Arizona Attorney? 

Professional misconduct may involve a violation of the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct found at Rule 42 or another obligation imposed by the Arizona Supreme Court Rules. 

Common allegations include: 

• lack of competence or adequate preparation; 
• neglect or lack of diligence; 
• failure to communicate with a client; 
• charging an unreasonable fee; 
• mishandling client funds or trust-account violations; 
• conflicts of interest; 
• breach of client confidentiality; 
• improper termination of representation; 
• failure to return a client’s file or unearned fees; 
• lack of candor toward a court; 
• false statements or misrepresentations; 
• conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; 
• improper communications with a represented person; 
• criminal conduct bearing on honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness;
• failure to supervise attorneys or nonlawyer staff;
• failure to report another lawyer’s serious misconduct; or 
• failure to cooperate honestly and fully with a State Bar investigation. 

Not every unfavorable result, missed expectation, fee dispute, or disagreement with a client establishes an ethical violation. The relevant circumstances may include the terms of the representation, communications between the parties, deadlines, staffing, information available to the attorney, client instructions, remedial measures, and whether anyone suffered actual or potential harm. 

What Happens During an Arizona State Bar Disciplinary Case?

Step 1: The State Bar Receives a Charge 

A bar charge may be submitted by a client, former client, opposing party, another attorney, judge, employer, government agency, or any other person. The State Bar may also receive information through a criminal case, trust-account matter, judicial referral, or disciplinary proceeding in another jurisdiction. 

Most concerns begin with the State Bar’s Intake Department. An Intake Lawyer may speak with the complainant and respondent attorney to determine whether the allegations: 

• fall within the Bar’s jurisdiction; 
• can be resolved informally; 
• should be dismissed; 
• may be appropriate for diversion; or 
• warrant a screening investigation. 

If the Intake Lawyer finds insufficient grounds to proceed, the matter may be dismissed. The complainant may seek review of that dismissal by Chief Bar Counsel. 

Step 2: Screening Investigation 

More serious matters are referred to the State Bar’s Litigation Department for a screening investigation. 

The assigned Bar Counsel generally sends the attorney a copy of the written charge and requests a written response. 

During the investigation, Bar Counsel may: 

• request documents or additional written explanations; 
• interview the respondent, complainant, or witnesses;
• obtain court records, financial records, or trust-account records;
• examine client communications and files; 
• subpoena evidence when authorized; and 
• investigate related violations disclosed by the evidence. 

An attorney has a duty to cooperate with a lawful disciplinary investigation. Failure to respond fully and honestly may become a separate allegation under ER 8.1(b) and Rule 54(d). 

This does not mean that an attorney should respond hastily. A written response can define the case, reveal additional issues, and later be used in formal proceedings. Counsel can help determine what information must be disclosed, what mitigating evidence to produce, how privileged or confidential material should be handled, and whether parallel criminal, employment, or civil proceedings require special precautions. 

Step 3: Bar Counsel’s Report and Recommendation 

After completing the investigation, Bar Counsel prepares a Report of Investigation describing the evidence, potential violations, and recommended disposition. 

If Bar Counsel recommends dismissal, the respondent is notified, but ordinarily does not receive the Report of Investigation. The complainant may object and request ADPCC review. 

If Bar Counsel recommends diversion or discipline, the report is provided to the respondent and submitted to the ADPCC. The respondent may submit a written response or objection for the Committee’s consideration. 

Step 4: Attorney Discipline Probable Cause Committee Review 

The Attorney Discipline Probable Cause Committee is a permanent committee of the Arizona Supreme Court and is independent of the State Bar. It consists of six attorney members and three public members and generally meets monthly. 

The Committee’s meetings are closed to the respondent, respondent’s counsel, and the public. Before the meeting, members receive Bar Counsel’s factual summary, the implicated ethical rules, Bar Counsel’s recommendation, and any written response submitted by the respondent. 

At the meeting, Bar Counsel presents the case. The Committee may: 

• direct further investigation; 
• dismiss the allegations;
• offer or order diversion where appropriate; 
• issue an admonition; 
• impose probation, restitution, costs, or other informal measures; or
• find probable cause and authorize a formal disciplinary complaint. 

To authorize formal proceedings, the Committee considers whether it is reasonable to believe that misconduct warranting discipline can be proven by clear and convincing evidence, the seriousness of the conduct, actual or potential injury, and the attorney’s disciplinary or diversion history. See Rule 55(c)(2). 

Step 5: Formal Disciplinary Proceedings 

Formal proceedings begin when Bar Counsel files a complaint with the Disciplinary Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court. The case is overseen by the Presiding Disciplinary Judge. 

The respondent must file an answer within the deadline prescribed by the rules. The case then proceeds through: 

• an initial case-management conference; 
• disclosures and discovery; 
• depositions, when appropriate; 
• motions and other prehearing proceedings; and 
• a hearing on the merits if the case is not resolved. 

A consent agreement may be negotiated during formal proceedings, but it must be approved by the Presiding Disciplinary Judge before becoming final. 

Step 6: Disciplinary Hearing 

If the case does not settle, it proceeds to a hearing before a three-member disciplinary panel consisting of: 

• the Presiding Disciplinary Judge; 
• a volunteer attorney; and 
• a volunteer public member. 

The hearing resembles a trial. Bar Counsel and the respondent may present documents, call witnesses, cross-examine opposing witnesses, offer expert testimony, and make legal arguments. 

Bar Counsel bears the burden of proving charged misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. After the hearing, the panel issues a written decision addressing the alleged

violations and any sanction. If misconduct is proven, the panel applies the ABA Standards to determine the appropriate sanction.  

Step 7: Arizona Supreme Court Review 

Either the respondent or the State Bar may appeal the disciplinary panel’s decision to the Arizona Supreme Court. A notice of appeal generally must be filed within ten days after service of the decision. See Rule 59. 

The parties submit appellate briefs, and the Court may hold oral argument. The Arizona Supreme Court reviews attorney-discipline matters de novo and may affirm, modify, dismiss, or remand the case. 

Attorney discipline differs from an ordinary administrative licensing appeal: the appeal goes directly through the attorney-discipline system to the Arizona Supreme Court, not to the Office of Administrative Hearings or Superior Court. 

What Outcomes Can Result From an Arizona Bar Charge? 

When professional misconduct is established, the sanction is determined in accordance with the American Bar Association’s Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (“ABA Standards”). See Rule 58(k), Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court. The State Bar uses these Standards when evaluating what discipline to propose in a consent agreement, and the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, hearing panel, and Arizona Supreme Court apply them when reviewing or imposing discipline. 

The ABA Standards consider: 

• the ethical duty violated; 
• the attorney’s mental state—whether the conduct was intentional, knowing, or negligent; 
• the actual or potential injury caused by the misconduct; 
• the presumptive sanction for the particular violation; and 
• applicable aggravating and mitigating circumstances. 

Possible outcomes include: 

• Dismissal. The allegations do not establish an ethical violation or do not warrant further action. 
• Dismissal with Educational Comment. The matter is dismissed, but the attorney receives guidance concerning the questioned conduct.
• Diversion. The attorney completes remedial measures in place of discipline. Diversion is confidential, and successful completion ordinarily results in dismissal of the underlying charge. 
• Admonition. An informal disciplinary sanction. 
• Probation. The attorney may continue practicing subject to education, monitoring, treatment, practice-management requirements, or other conditions.
• Restitution. The attorney may be required to repay funds or compensate an affected person as authorized by the rules. 
• Reprimand. A formal public sanction imposed by the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, hearing panel, or Supreme Court. 
• Suspension. The attorney is prohibited from practicing for the period ordered. Reinstatement requirements depend in part on the length of the suspension.
• Disbarment. The attorney is removed from the practice of law and may not seek reinstatement until the applicable waiting period has passed. 
• Costs and Expenses. A disciplined attorney will be ordered to pay the costs of the proceeding. 

The ABA Standards identify a presumptive sanction based on the nature of the misconduct, mental state, and degree of actual or potential injury. That sanction may then be increased or reduced based on aggravating and mitigating factors 

What Is Diversion? 

Diversion is a confidential alternative to discipline intended primarily for minor misconduct that can be addressed through education, treatment, monitoring, or improved practice-management procedures. 

Possible diversion terms include: 

• continuing legal education; 
• the Ethics Enhancement Program; 
• trust-account education; 
• law-office management assistance; 
• practice monitoring or mentoring; 
• participation in the Member Assistance Program; 
• counseling or other professional treatment; 
• fee arbitration; 
• restitution; or 
• another agreed corrective measure. 

Diversion is generally unavailable when the alleged conduct involves serious misconduct, dishonesty, fraud, theft, self-dealing, breach of fiduciary duty, substantial

harm, or conduct likely to warrant suspension or disbarment. An attorney’s disciplinary history, prior diversion, lack of cooperation, or continuing risk to the public may also affect eligibility. 

Successful completion of diversion ordinarily results in dismissal without a disciplinary record arising from the charge. See the State Bar’s diversion guidance. 

Why Should Even an Attorney Hire Counsel Early? 

The familiar warning that “a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client” is especially relevant in a disciplinary investigation. Attorneys are trained to advocate for others, but defending their own license, reputation, and livelihood makes it difficult to evaluate the allegations objectively. A respondent attorney may become defensive, overexplain the circumstances, make unnecessary admissions, or assume that professional experience alone is enough to navigate a specialized disciplinary process. 

One of the most consequential mistakes an attorney can make is waiting until after submitting a written response or receiving an adverse recommendation to consult counsel. An attorney may understandably believe that a candid, informal explanation will quickly resolve the matter. However, a rushed, incomplete, or imprecise response may be provided to the complainant, expand the investigation, create credibility concerns, support additional ethical allegations, disclose unnecessary confidential information, or later be introduced during formal proceedings. 

Independent counsel can assess the evidence more objectively, identify weaknesses in the allegations, and communicate with the State Bar without the emotion that naturally accompanies defending one’s own professional conduct. Counsel can also help by: 

• identifying the allegations and applicable ethical rules; 
• preparing a focused written response; 
• gathering favorable documents and witness statements; 
• addressing confidentiality, privilege, and constitutional concerns;
• developing mitigation and evidence of rehabilitation; 
• responding to the Report of Investigation; 
• advocating before the ADPCC in writing; 
• negotiating diversion or a consent agreement; and 
• defending the case before the disciplinary panel and Arizona Supreme Court. 

Early representation provides the best opportunity to frame the facts accurately, avoid unintended consequences, and seek dismissal or another favorable resolution. 

Why Choose Lavy Law?

Arizona attorney-discipline cases require more than familiarity with ethics rules and administrative procedures. They require the ability to investigate disputed facts, evaluate documentary evidence, prepare witnesses, challenge credibility, negotiate with government counsel, and try the case when a fair resolution cannot be reached. 

At Lavy Law, our foundation is trial advocacy. Before focusing on professional-license defense, Attorney Kara Lavy served as a prosecutor and developed extensive experience litigating criminal, immigration, and administrative matters. She is licensed to practice in Arizona, California, and New York. 

The same courtroom skills—building a factual defense, identifying inconsistencies, cross-examining witnesses, challenging government evidence, and presenting persuasive legal arguments—are brought to every professional-discipline case. 

Whether the objective is dismissal during intake, confidential diversion, a limited public record, reasonable probation, a favorable consent agreement, or prevailing after a contested hearing, Lavy Law is prepared to advocate at every stage. 

Frequently Asked Questions

At Lavy Law, we represent attorneys regardless of whether insurance coverage is available. If you seek reimbursement, we can maintain detailed time records and provide an itemized accounting upon conclusion of the representation. The client remains responsible for communicating with the carrier and submitting the documentation required under the policy.