Search below by keyword, phrase or year for Formal Ethics Opinions issued from 1985 to the present. Most opinions older than 1995 are available as Adobe Acrobat .pdf Files. Reading these files requires the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Refer to .pdf file viewing help for more information.

Using this form, it is also possible to construct sophisticated queries using the wildcard (*) and other search operators. Refer to the list of search tips for more information.

Click here to access a chronological index of the current Ethical Rules and their related opinions.

NEW! Click here to sign up to receive an email when the State Bar of Arizona's Ethics Committee releases a new ethics opinion.

07-04: Joint Representation; Conflicts; Communication; Informed Consent The representation of multiple clients in a single litigation matter is generally permissible so long as the lawyer reasonably believes that he or she will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each client, the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client, and each client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.  Ethical Rule ("ER") 1.7(b). The requirement of informed consent arises only if, as an initial matter, the lawyer determines that the lawyer can, in fact, competently and diligently represent each client in the particular matter. Once that determination is made, the lawyer bears the burden of showing that there was adequate disclosure to each client and that each client gave an informed consent.

The disclosures required to obtain the client's "informed consent" will depend on the facts and circumstances of the particular matter. The lawyer must explain the possible effects of the common representation on the lawyer's obligations of loyalty, confidentiality and the attorney-client privilege. In addition to the confirming writing required by ER 1.7(b), informed consent usually will require that the lawyer explain the advantages and disadvantages of the common representation in sufficient detail so that each client can understand why separate counsel may be desirable. Finally, during the course of the matter, the lawyer must continue to evaluate whether conflicts have arisen that may require additional disclosures and consent or withdrawal from the representation.

07-03: Confidentiality; Electronic Communications; Inadvertent Disclosure While modern electronic communications are often greatly beneficial to the client, lawyers who use them to send or receive documents or other communications on behalf of clients must be aware that they carry certain risks. Lawyers must take reasonable precautions to prevent inadvertent disclosure of confidential information.

Except in the specific circumstances described in this opinion, a lawyer who receives an electronic communication may not examine it for the purpose of discovering the metadata embedded in it.

07-02: Maintaining Client Files; Client's Papers and Documents; Electronic Storage In appropriate cases, a lawyer may keep current and closed client files as electronic images in an attempt to maintain a paperless law practice or to more economically store files.

After digitizing paper documents, a lawyer may not, without client consent, destroy original paper documents that belong to or were obtained from the client. After digitizing paper documents, a lawyer may destroy copies of paper documents that were obtained from the client unless the lawyer has reason to know that the client wants the lawyer to retain them. A lawyer has the discretion to decide whether to maintain the balance of the file solely as electronic images and destroy the paper documents.