Common Defense Spring 2024

Spring 2024

COMMON

Defense

The Arizona Association of Defense Counsel Newsletter

Dedicated To Your Success INSIDE THIS ISSUE Defusing The Nuclear Bomb Profile of Michael Beale, Esq. Become an Active Writer YLD Softball Tournament Champs

May 9, 2024 12pm - 5pm

2024 Annual Meeting

INDEX

SPRING 2024 NEWSLETTER Page 2: Message From the President Page 3: Defusing the Nuclear Bomb: How to Prevent Outsized Verdicts Page 4: Choice Words: Legal Writing Tips Become an Active Writer Page 6: Tales From South of the Gila Page 10: Remembering Michael Beale, Esq. Page 12: 2024 Oplinger-Blake Closing Argument Competition Page 14: For The Defense Page 15: 2023 Phoenix Judicial Reception

The AADC Has Proudly Served as Arizona's State-Wide Association for Civil Defense Lawyers Since 1965.

1

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

A Message From the President As move forward in 2024, we are excited about our upcoming programming. The AADC is proud to be a leader in continuing to provide outstanding CLE programming for its members. Among the many benefits of AADC membership are free webinars, in-person CLE, Amicus support, and legislative monitoring. In addition, the AADC Listserve has grown considerably over the past few years and continues to be a valuable resource for our members.

I am also pleased to announce that our in-person networking opportunities, which were huge successes in 2023, will be even more robust in 2024. The AADC’s Annual Meeting will take place on May 9, 2024 from 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at Evie’s Pavilion at the Papago Golf Club. We have an outstanding program planned for the annual meeting which includes 2 hours of ethics credit. We look forward to seeing you there.

Additionally, the Fall Kickoff will return this September. More details with respect to the Fall Kickoff will be coming in the months ahead. Also returning in 2024 will be the Barry Fish Charity Golf Tournament at Top Golf. This event, which bears the name of former AADC President Barry Fish, is a fun filled event that benefits the Arizona Chapter of the ALS Association. We are also working to freshen up the December Holiday Judicial. Stay tuned for details!

The AADC welcomes your ideas about how we can continue improving and invites you to participate in one of our many committees. Thank you for your continued support of the AADC and I look forward to a fantastic remainder of 2024.

Brian Rubin AADC President 2023-2024

2 COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Defusing the Nuclear Bomb: How to Prevent Outsized Verdicts BY: LYNN ALLEN, ESQ. & SITAR BHATT, ESQ TYSON MENDES

You have seen the headlines and the billboards: juries across the country are returning Nuclear Verdicts® in record numbers, and the plaintiffs’ bar is capitalizing.

Arizona is no exception. In November of 2023, a jury awarded $31,550,825 for a cerebral palsy birth injury. In the June 2023 edition of the Arizona Attorney magazine, among the top civil verdicts were an $18,791,000 verdict for malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and other various torts.

At Tyson & Mendes, we believe justice is not just for plaintiffs but also for defendants. Compensation to an injured party should be fair and reasonable, but plaintiffs’ lawyers have changed the way they try cases to capitalize on juror emotions and maximize awards with little regard for what is fair. They no longer target juror sympathy but rather focus on generating juror anger. The plaintiffs’ bar uses tactics such as the reptile theory (now rebranded as “The Edge”), in conjunction with anchoring large numbers as early as voir dire. It is no longer enough for the defense to punch holes in plaintiffs’ case. Defense strategies such as ignoring bad facts, fighting liability at all costs, or avoiding talking about money no longer work to prevent outsized awards. This article discusses some of the methods we use to defuse juror anger and stop Nuclear Verdicts®.

Accept Responsibility. Taking responsibility is critical for validating juror anger in order to defuse it, even when you

3

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

are defending on liability. Accepting responsibility allows the defense to be the most reasonable people in the room. Jurors are more likely to listen to, trust, and be persuaded by your position.

Accepting responsibility in an admitted liability case is easy. But we believe the defense must accept responsibility for something in every case, even when seeking a defense verdict. It may feel impossible, but there are ways to accept responsibility without admitting liability: remember that responsibility is not the same as liability! You can accept responsibility for meeting the applicable standard of care, maintaining a safe workplace, or following your employee handbook. Accept continued on page 7

Choice Words: Legal Writing Tips Become an Active Writer Does that mean the folks in the no-extra-reading group can’t become better writers? Of course not.

Here’s one non-reading tip that’s helped me become a better writer: Become more active and intentional about the time you already spend writing.

Amanda Haverstick is a 20-year veteran Big Law litigator who founded and runs Writing Law Tutors LLC, a legal-writing coaching company that helps litigators and law students become better writers. Amanda also publishes a monthly newsletter, “3 Bullets” (available for sign-up at Dear1L.com), and she has authored the forthcoming book, Dear 1L: Notes to Nurture a New Legal Writer.

Dear Legal Writer, Conventional wisdom says the best way to become a better writer is to read lots of “good” writing. That may be sound advice, but many will find it woefully impractical.

What percentage of lawyers and law students have daily free time to read significant additional writing, “good” or otherwise? And if you have a house full of people needing you at the start and end of each work day, chances are your at-home reading time is fleeting—if it exists at all.

Instead of reworking a sentence to avoid using words or phrases you’re not sure how to use, spell, or punctuate, look these questions up. Learn the answers.

Then make a conscious effort to integrate those answers by practicing them in the writing you’re already doing for work or school.

Eventually, you’ll start to incorporate new writing techniques naturally, without even thinking about them.

Indeed, lawyers often lament how little time they have to read anymore. Any reading feats may be confined to children’s books. For many, therefore, the conventional wisdom will fail. Telling them to read more will either land on deaf ears or never get put into practice. Added to this group are those who simply loathe reading for pleasure and those for whom reading is onerous due to poor eyesight or other non-conventional reasons.

4 COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

5

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Tales From South of the Gila

BY PETER COLLINS, ESQ. GUST ROSENFELD

This is the first of a periodic AADC newsletter from the red-headed stepchildren South of the Gila River.

KUDOS to J.C. Patrascioiu and Andrew Petersen for their recent defense verdicts in difficult and challenging jury trials.

REASONABLE MEDICAL EXPENSE. We still do not have a definitive ruling from the Arizona Court of Appeals on this issue, but Judges in Pima County Superior Court appear to lean towards allowing defense experts to testify, despite the very best efforts of a particular Maricopa Plaintiff lawyer who has volunteered to “assist” local lawyers on this issue. AADC has arranged a “brief bank” to collect filings on the issue. More to follow.

MORE KUDOS. I am grateful and privileged to call Burr Udall a friend. After his 70 years in practice here, he has befriended most of us. He is our Senior Advisor on all things insurance. Burr still practices, although with shorter hours. He is active in defense matters, plus as an arbitrator and mediator. We recently spoke, and he related stories which many of you have heard but some have not.

Because they are still timely, I think they are worth repeating.

Burr started when there were only three Judges in Pima County (now 43) and one Federal Judge (now 15). There were only four woman lawyers. All legal offices, including the Pima County Jail were housed in the domed courthouse on Church Street. continued on page 8

6 COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Defusing the Nuclear Bomb: How to Prevent Outsized Verdicts continued responsibility for something you are proud of! As counsel, you can and should discuss responsibility during voir dire, opening and closing, and even during witness testimony. Telling a personal story about how you learned to accept responsibility as a child will help the jury connect with you. An added benefit to accepting responsibility: it also allows you to turn the tables and invite jurors to consider the plaintiff has not accepted responsibility and should be held accountable.

Give a Number. Plaintiff attorneys use the psychological concepts of primacy and recency to condition the jury to a large number before the jury has heard any evidence. They repeat their large numbers during voir dire and opening statements, and even during the examination of witnesses. If all the jury hears is that this is a $20 million dollar case during all phases of a trial, they will believe it is a $20 million dollar case when they deliberate, even if that number is unsupported by the evidence and wildly unjust. It is not enough to wait until closing arguments to give your defense number. Instead, the defense must use psychology to our clients’ advantage and address the expensive elephant in the room; we must talk about money.

We believe you should give your number early and often, during voir dire if your judge allows it but certainly during your opening statement. You can even be creative and work your number into witness examinations, by talking about your economic numbers during doctor and expert witness examinations. It is not important whether the witness agrees with your number—what is important that the jury hears your number throughout the case.

However, once you give a number, it should never go up or the jury will think you heard something during trial that caused you to lose confidence in your case.

You will lose credibility.

It is also possible to give a number while asking for a defense verdict. You will spend significant time during trial on damages, even bringing in your own expert witnesses. If you explain to the jury you have an obligation to address all the evidence, it will make sense and, again, make you appear reasonable.

Studies and our own experience have shown that your chances of getting a defense verdict actually increase when you give a number.

7

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Argue Pain and Suffering. Pain and suffering are the largest component of most Nuclear Verdicts®. But most defense lawyers avoid arguing pain and suffering altogether. You can be assured plaintiff’s counsel will focus extensively on her client’s pain and suffering, comparing her client to Kobe Bryant or a Picasso painting. It is a not enough for defense counsel to simply argue that non-economic damages must be fair and reasonable. You need to persuade the jury with real life examples that will resonate and allow them to feel they did the right thing.

So how should the defense argue pain and suffering? We look at pain and suffering two ways: 1) the impact of the accident on plaintiff’s life, and 2) the impact of money on the plaintiff’s life. As defense lawyers, you probably already argue about how the accident has impacted the plaintiff and her recovery. Even in bad injury cases, you can tell the good news about what plaintiff can do and dispel the dismal story plaintiff’s counsel will tell. By focusing on the positive, you can credibly argue for a much lower number.

The impact of money on plaintiff’s life can be shown by discussing the activities plaintiff and her family enjoy, such as camping, fishing, trips to Disneyland, or traveling, and the very real impact your number will have on plaintiff’s life. You can talk about all the good things defense number pays for and what expenses that amount of money covers in the plaintiff’s life. You can close by telling the jury that the amount of money you ask them to award will have a huge impact on plaintiff’s life. Not only does this ground the jury in the actual value of a dollar, but it showcases your humanity and caring by demonstrating the specific ways in which your number will improve plaintiff’s life.

Learning and using these methods in trial will allow you to defuse juror anger and avoid a Nuclear Verdict® by capitalizing on reasonableness and common sense.

Tales From South of the Gila continued

Burr was called by a Superior Court Judge - after three months in practice - to defend a first-degree murder case!

He tried about 400 jury trials in his career, the last when he was 78 years old.

Burr is a true hero of the Defense Bar, and a legend.

NEWS FROM PIMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: Gross numbers. Anecdotally, more civil cases are being filed, but very few are tried. This is particularly with FASTAR cases. Total filed: 2022: 1,227. 2023: 1,125. 776 so far in 2024. One Judge told me he had the most trials of any judge on that bench: three or four in a year.

Numbers of trials are about even with prior years, with only 1.17% of all tort cases actually going to trial. (30 trials, 16 jury, 14 bench) (thru 1/2024).

Court Reporters may not be available for your trial!

Several have retired, and the Court can no longer guarantee that you will have one. The Rules permit you to hire your own. If the case is worth trying, it might be good practice to hire a private reporter, in any case.

Hearing Officer proceedings (evictions, garnishments, debtor exams.) These have been handled by Judge Metzger, but she is moving to other tasks and will not be replaced. So these hearings will be added to the assigned judge’s calendar. The Court is considering adding a Thursday morning schedule for such matters, but stay tuned.

2023 Jury Trial Results (Torts) 2023 (calendar year) 25 jury trial verdicts: 12 for plaintiff, 9 for defendant, 2 mistrials, 1 settled during trial, 1 dismissed.

REMINDER: The Arizona State Bar College of Trial Advocacy will convene July 31 through August 3, 2024.

Great opportunity for lawyers without great jury trial experience. Fabulous faculty, including Judges Browning and Bergin and Justice Pelander. Culminates with a jury trial with real jurors on Saturday morning. https://azbar.ce21.com/item/2024-arizona-college-trialadvocacy-605786. Contact Betty Flores if interested: 602.340.7215.

8

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

SIDEBAR By: James D. Smith, Esq. Osborn Maledon “There are a lot of people working hard from 9:00 to 5:00. What are you doing in your 5:00 to 9:00?” I had dinner recently with non-lawyer friends who are very successful in their fields, and one of them used that phrase. It might sound cold or cliché, but he didn’t mean it in that sense. He was relating a situation with one of his subordinates who was frustrated with his career development. A couple of things surprised me about the way both these non-lawyers viewed the situation.

But take a step back from the 5:00 to 9:00 comment. We’ll call my friend “MB.” MB has been working with the fellow for about two months and experienced some hiccups. MB’s first response wasn’t to criticize the subordinate, though. Instead, it was to recognize that the subordinate had ineffective leaders before working with MB. No one explained to the subordinate how to excel, to advance, and to improve himself. In MB’s view, it was “lazy leadership.” Prior supervisors never took the time to mentor the fellow early in his career. Now that he is 10 years into it, the man is experiencing the consequences of having lazy leaders. MB placed the blame on them, not the subordinate.

Now, back to the 5:00 to 9:00. I recognize that lawyers work well before 9:00 a.m. and well after 5:00 p.m. Rest assured, MB works those long hours, too. His point is that we all must take responsibility for our professional growth. And that can be difficult when you’re raising young children, caring for elderly parents, or any host of other things. There isn’t a great answer— trust me, I wish I had one. It takes time, though, and there is no way to create more than 24 hours in a day. So work with what you’re able to. Is that 30 minutes on the weekend? Maybe it is 30 minutes each night. Also, tackle that approach with purpose. Do you want to use those 30 minutes to network? Develop more expertise in a substantive area of law? Identify the goal and then identify the steps to achieve that goal. That goes for everyone up to the CEO, too—both of these non-lawyers said that everyone in the C-suite in their organizations is always identifying ways to improve themselves.

The last and most important part gets back to lazy leadership. As my friends chatted with me, I realized that many senior lawyers aren’t very good at actively managing people to succeed. We know that law school doesn’t teach people how to practice law, but we don’t do enough to give young lawyers the tools to succeed. We’re too often lazy leaders. That isn’t fair to the young lawyers working with us, and it isn’t good for the profession. I’m not in the equivalent of the C-suite, but I’m adopting a selfimprovement plan. My first step is to be a more active leader.

Remembering Michael Beale, Esq. On February 7, 2024, the Arizona legal community lost an esteemed attorney and friend, Michael Beale. Mike was a highly skilled and respected lawyer who began his career in 1968 after graduating from law school at the University of Arizona. Mike began his practice as a civil defense lawyer with Jennings, Strouss, Salmon and Trask, quickly rising to partner. In 1975, Mike served as President of the Arizona Association of Defense Counsel. He eventually formed Beale, Micheaels, Slack & Shugart where he handled cases for both plaintiffs and defendants. We recently had the opportunity catch up with a couple of Mike’s partners, John Micheaels and Thom Slack, to reflect on Mike’s life and accomplishments.

What did Mike enjoy most about being an attorney?

John Micheaels: “Mike was a competitor. Although, he played very fairly, Mike was a ferocious competitor even when playing racquet ball, though he was not much good at it. He hated to lose. He was a state champion wrestler in high school. He also really enjoyed getting up and talking to people. He could get up in front of anyone at any time. If he had a few minutes to think about what he was going to say, he had a way of delivering it, a presence that kept your interest. Even in the most serious case, Mike could have levity in a very appropriate way. He was just good at it.”

What do you recall about Mike as a mentor?

Thom Slack: “Mike was a great mentor to young lawyers by being hands off. He was the president of every organization including the AADC. He was a part of the American College of Trial Lawyers. He was always a believer that we needed the system of the jury trial, and he wanted the young lawyers to do that and be trial lawyers.”

“I had about 50 questions prepared as I was gearing up for one of my first trial. I went into Mike’s office, and I told him I had questions about this trial, which I was doing solo. After I get through the first questions, Mike said ‘Tommy, quit being apoplectic and go try your case.’ Mike would not tell me anymore, and I went over and won the case. Mike was just that kind of guy. He just made you feel like you could do this.”

10

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

What was Mike’s biggest case or accomplishment?

Thom Slack: “Mike never acted proud, but he clearly understood his role. There was a case called Bledsoe v. SRP. It was a really sad case where a firefighter was riding his bike to work. It was dark, and the plaintiff hit a cable gate as he was going down SRP canals on his way to work. He went over the handlebars, and he ended up a quadriplegic. The plaintiff went back to school, and he got a degree. He was working on computers. He also got married after the accident and had children. Mike loved this guy, and he thought he was the most amazing person the world, but Mike’s job was to defend SRP. The case went to trial, and the jury came back with a very large verdict, but it did not bother Mike. He wasn’t somebody who took it personally at all. Mike was a fan of things coming out the way they should. SRP was a perfect fit for Mike because they tried really hard to do the right thing.”

What were Mike’s interest outside of work?

John Micheaels: “Mike had an interest in military history. He toured battle sites from the Civil War, World War I, and World War II.” John also told us that “most of his stories about Mike cannot be publicized. He was absolutely, by far, the funniest guy I’ve ever been around.”

Thom Slack “He was somebody that you liked to know. He never tried to be a lawyer. In fact, he would introduce himself as a shoe salesman. That was Mike. He was never impressed with himself. He was just that guy. He loved to go fly-fishing. Every year we would go on a trip and Mike would be there. He didn’t care whether he caught any fish. He just enjoyed the comradery. There was never talk about the law, just stuff he was interested in. Mike was the type of guy that would always ask questions. He was genuinely interested in other people’s lives and the people in their lives.”

I heard Mike liked to pull pranks. Are there any specific pranks you remember?

John Micheaels: “Mike loved doing April Fools’ jokes. In 1991, Aprils Fools’ Day fell on a Monday. Mike had his secretary dummy up a memo from Mike stating that he heard a bad faith lawyer was filing a class action against several defense firms in Phoenix. The basis for the suit was that they had colluded to defraud their policy holders by agreeing to allow ‘value billing.’ Mike put the memo on all the attorneys’ chairs at Jennings Strouss causing mass panic.”

What do you remember most about Mike?

John Micheaels: “Mike had a big heart. Even the cases that he defended, and he defended some very big cases, he always was very respectful and empathetic for the plaintiffs. He has this way about him that people would easily warm up to him or he would warm up to them. Mike enjoyed representing folks that he felt were deserving whether it was the plaintiff’s side or defense side.”

11

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

2024 Oplinger-Blake Closing Argument Competition

Madison VanNatter

Diego Ruiz Cruz

Keyerra Harfield

Each year, the AADC proudly sponsors the Oplinger-Blake ASU Moot Court Competition. This prestigious event provides law students with a unique opportunity to hone their advocacy skills by presenting closing arguments based on materials derived from actual court cases. These materials include a complaint, deposition transcripts, case materials, photographs, and relevant jury instructions, all of which are drawn from cases that have successfully navigated through the trial process.

One of the distinguishing features of this competition is the challenging timeline within which students must work. They receive the case materials less than a week before the preliminary rounds, leaving them with limited time to analyze, strategize, and craft their arguments. Despite these constraints, the dedication and preparation demonstrated by the participating students are truly commendable.

The success of the competition is also indebted to the volunteer efforts of AADC members J.P. Harrington Bisceglia (Christian, Dichter & Sluga), and David Schmidt (Jaburg Wilk), who graciously served as judges. They evaluated the students based on a variety of criteria, including their ability to develop arguments using the available facts and law, the persuasiveness of their arguments, and their overall presentation style. Additionally, the judges provided valuable verbal coaching and feedback to each team following their argument, further enriching the learning experience for all participants.

The students who participated in this year's competition demonstrated exceptional skill and professionalism, making the judges' task of selecting winners a challenging one. The AADC congratulates the winners of the 2024 Oplinger-Blake Closing Argument Moot Court Competition for their outstanding performance: 1st Place - Madison VanNatter 2nd Place - Diego Ruiz Cruz 3rd place - Keyerra Harfield Their dedication to excellence serves as an inspiration to future participants and exemplifies the high standards of advocacy upheld by the AADC.

12 COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Congratulations to all the law clerks and law students who tackled the February 2024 bar exam! We know it wasn't easy, and we wish you the best of luck with the results.

On the Lighter Side: The YLD hosted a fantastic AADC Annual Softball Tournament on February 24th, raising nearly $9,000 for Southwest Human Development (SWHD), helping Arizona children with early development. A big thank you to all the participating law firms for supporting the YLD and SWHD including: Burch & Cracchiolo; Carpenter Hazlewood; Cavanagh Law; Gordon Rees; Jaburg Wilk; Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, Sanders & Parks; and Snell & Wilmer. Reigning champions, Sanders and Parks took home the trophy for the second year in a row, but not without a good fight. Congratulations to team Sanders & Parks!

Shoutout to our Sponsors: We'd also like to express our gratitude to Integrated Medical Evaluations, Augspurger Komm Engineering, and the AADC for their generous sponsorship which helped make the tournament a success. If you missed the event, you can still make a donation to support Southwest Human Development using this link: https://www.classy.org/give/550611/#!/donation/checkout A special thank you to Maria McKee, YLD Softball Committee Chair, who took the laboring oar on organizing the 2023 tournament. We are grateful for your time and efforts to make the tournament a success!

Save the Date!

The YLD is already planning next year's softball tournament. Mark your calendars for the last weekend of February or the first weekend of March as we return to the Tempe Sports Complex! The YLD is recruiting committee members to help with planning the 2025 Softball Tournament. Please reach out to me at sbaldwin@jshfirm.com if you are interested in participating.

Looking Ahead: For the rest of the year, the YLD will focus on: Community outreach to state law schools.

Presenting a CLE with a strong emphasis on technology's impact on our legal practices.

If you are a new(ish) lawyer, we encourage you to become active in the YLD to enhance your professional development while engaging with your peers and colleagues in the civil defense practice.

We look forward to seeing you at the YLD's upcoming events!

Stephanie Baldwin, Esq. YLD President 2023-2024

13

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

For The Defense Steve Bullington and Cory Tyszka of Jones, Skelton & Hochuli obtained a unanimous defense verdict in a medical malpractice case in Maricopa County. The wrongful death case involved allegations of medical malpractice arising from a radiologist’s report of no deep venous thrombosis (“DVT”) on review of a 49-year-old patient’s venous Doppler ultrasound after she presented to the emergency department with calf pain and swelling following a foot fracture. Almost three weeks later, the patient suddenly collapsed and died, and an autopsy confirmed that the death was caused by a massive saddle pulmonary embolus. The ten-person jury returned the defense verdict after deliberating for about two hours.

J.C. Patrascioiu of Curl, Glasson & Patrascioiu represented the defendant in a negligence case in Pima County. Plaintiff was a homeowner in an active adult retirement community. The defendant was a local business. The employee dropped a 400 lbs fountain and it landed on the plaintiff’s foot at her home during delivery. The defendant admitted the plaintiff had a permanent injury and that the employee lost control of the fountain but argued the plaintiff stuck her foot under the fountain and thus was primarily, if not exclusively, at fault. The plaintiff claimed she didn’t know if she moved when the fountain was falling but that, if she did, it was an instinctive reaction to a sudden emergency created by the employee. The defendant served an offer of judgment for $300,000. The plaintiff asked for $1.6 million in closing and to find the defendant was comparatively at fault. The jury returned a defense verdict.

Jeff Collins of Jones, Skelton & Hochuli represented the defendant in a premises liability case in Pima County. Plaintiff claimed injury while exercising at defendant’s private fitness club. Plaintiff attempted to brace himself while stretching by grabbing a nearby Cybex machine consequently pulling the 500-pound machine over causing him to fall to the ground. As a result, he alleged meniscus tears in both knees. Defendant argued that the unanchored machine was not “unreasonably dangerous” and, if it was, defendant did not have notice and did not breach the applicable standard of care. Plaintiff did not admit evidence of his medical bills and requested an award consisting of $10 per waking hour in past (5 years before trial) and future (19-year life expectancy) pain and suffering for a total of approximately $1.3M. The eight-person jury deliberated for 75 minutes returning a verdict for the defendant.

Rick Righi and Chris Begeman of Righi Fitch Law Group represented a roofing general contractor in a construction defect lawsuit. Recognizing that water intrusion into the building envelope was occurring at the project, Rick and Chris advised the general contractor to utilize a fee-shifting strategy and make a strategic settlement offer, based on a fair market repair bid, of $1.3 million. This offer was rejected and trial ensued. At trial, the jury found in favor of the general contractor and rendered a full defense verdict. As the prevailing party, Rick and Chris sought to recover the defense fees and costs incurred in successfully defending the general contractor's interests. The court agreed with Rick and Chris that the general contractor was the prevailing party and awarded the general contractor its fees and costs against the plaintiff amounting to nearly $1.3 million. Righi Fitch Law Group turned a complicated situation, offering $1.3 million to settle, into an optimal one, recovering $1.3 million from plaintiff.

Georgia Staton and Justin Ackerman of Jones, Skelton & Hochuli prevailed on summary judgment in a case involving the Greenlee County Board of Supervisors (BOS) and the Greenlee County Sheriff. The Sheriff brough an action for declaratory relief alleging A.R.S. 11-444(b) and (c) gave him discretion to utilize funds received from the Board in a manner as he saw fit to fulfill the duties of the Sheriff’s Office. Staton and Ackerman filed for summary judgment on behalf of the Greenlee County BOS. Following cross-motions, the court ruled in favor of Greenlee BOS noting Sheriff Sumner “fundamentally misreads the statute” and that “[t]he Board – not the Sheriff – makes the final policy decisions that section 11-444 implements.” The Court denied all of Sheriff Sumner’s requested declaratory relief and ruled entirely in favor of the Greenlee County BOS.

14 COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

2023 Phoenix Judicial Reception

On December 6, 2023, the AADC hosted its Phoenix Holiday Judicial Reception at The Miracle Bar at Floor 13—a festive rooftop terrace and bar atop the Hilton Garden Inn in downtown Phoenix. The night’s honoree was retiring Judge Tim Thomason, who received the AADC Judicial Excellence Award.

Judge Thomason retired on October 31, 2023, after serving nine years on the Superior Court bench, including five as judge of the Commercial Court where he presided over complex commercial cases. Prior to taking the bench, he was a commercial litigator and a member of the gave a heartfelt speech praising Judge Thomason’s legal acumen and even-handed nature, noting Judge Thomason will be greatly missed in resolving commercial disputes.

The AADC also recognized Immediate Past President, Micalann Pepe, for her commitment and service to the AADC and its members during her tenure from 2022-2023.

15

COMMON DEFENSE | Spring 2024 | azadc.org

Eadie Rudder Carpenter Hazlewood

Dan Coumides Gust Rosenfeld

Maria McKee Maricopa County

Steven Crocchi Clyde & Co

Doreen Myles AADC Executive Director

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT We extend our heartfelt gratitude for this groups outstanding efforts in curating our Common Defense newsletter. Your dedication to providing valuable insights to our members is truly commendable and greatly appreciated. Thank you for contributing to the success of our organization.

The Arizona Association of Defense Counsel 6711 E. Camelback Road, Suite 64, Scottsdale, AZ 85251 602-743-3700 | admin@azadc.org