Arizona Sanctions Attorney Who Contested Election

The Arizona Presiding Disciplinary Judge accepted a 30-day consent suspension for a frivolous election challenge

The Agreement describes in detail the factual background for the admitted ethical violations, which is not repeated herein. Generally speaking, Mr. McCauley filed a Verified Statement of Election Contest on behalf of Mark Finchem. Mr. McCauley admits that he lacked a sufficient factual or legal basis for several allegations advanced in those proceedings and further admits that some of his claims were false, inaccurate, frivolous, or based on speculation. The superior court awarded attorneys’ fees against Mr. McCauley and his client. The Agreement states that, in considering the appropriate sanction, the parties “took into account that during the pendency of this disciplinary proceeding, Respondent, in the underlying action, voluntarily: a) Filed a motion to withdraw his appellate briefs, b) Filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, and c) Filed a motion to continue to allow his client time to obtain new counsel.”

Sanction

The aggravating and mitigating factors are off-setting, so the presumptive sanction of suspension is appropriate. Although the term of actual suspension is relatively brief, the Agreement requires Mr. McCauley to refrain from practicing law for at least one year thereafter, and he avows that he has no current intention of returning to the practice of law. Under these unique circumstances, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge concludes that the Agreement adequately serves the recognized purposes of the attorney disciplinary system.

(Mike Frisch)