The Arizona Presiding Judge approved a reprimand with two years of probation for misconduct in two matters.

Ms. Owsley was retained by Client A for a family law matter. Ms. Owsley asked Client A to meet her thirty minutes before the hearing at the courthouse. Ms. Owsley arrived only a few minutes prior to the hearing and asked Client A to accompany her in the bathroom so that she could “vape.” Ms. Owsley billed Client A thirty minutes for the brief bathroom conversation.

By a February 28, 2017 minute entry, the court set a June 12, 2017 deadline for the parties to exchange discovery. On June 6, 2017, Client A emailed Ms. Owsley’s paralegal a reminder of the upcoming deadline. The paralegal called Client A and told her that he was new and busy but would call her back on June 8, 2017. The paralegal failed to do so. Client A called Ms. Owsley’s firm again on June 9, 2017 and three times on June 12, 2017. The paralegal indicated during the last call on June 12, that the firm could not provide the discovery timely because Ms. Owsley was behind on her work. Client A also attempted to contact Ms. Owsley on her personal cell phone. Ms. Owsley responded via text message telling her “Don’t stress it. He [the paralegal] called me.” Ms. Owsley wrote in a subsequent text: “Did our office already do yours?” acknowledging she was unaware of whether she had completed Client A’s discovery. Ms. Owsley provided the discovery to the opposing party the following day, June 13, 2017.

In the joint pre-trial statement, the opposing party objected to all of Client A’s exhibits and witnesses because they were disclosed late. Ms. Owsley failed to timely file the exhibits despite a text message from Client A reminding her of the due date and requesting an update. Ms. Owsley failed to call or text Client A back. Shortly thereafter, Client A terminated Ms. Owsley. Ms. Owsley’s conduct in this count violates ERs 1.3, 1.4, and 5.3.

Another longtime client could no longer afford to pay the attorney, who moved to withdraw

Ms. Owsley knew the address of her client had been sealed by protective order because the opposing party had threatened to kill her. Despite this, Ms. Owsley included Client B’s home address in her Motion to Withdraw. She also attached an email from March 2016 in which Client B had given consent to withdraw which included client protected information. Client B never authorized the disclosure of the correspondence between her and the firm. Client B.

This was compounded because Ms. Owsley failed to send a copy of her motion to Client B. Instead, Client B only learned that the Motion to Withdraw had been filed after reviewing the Court docket, not from receiving a copy from Ms. Owsley.

(Mike Frisch)