EDWARD W. MATCHETT
Bar No. 010057
PDJ No. 2016-9107-R
By order of the presiding disciplinary judge filed
on Nov. 2, 2016, Edward W. Matchett, Douglas,
Ariz., was reinstated as an active member of the
State Bar of Arizona. Mr. Matchett had been suspended for violating a number of ethical rules in
connection with two cases, one involving federal
court litigation of a wrongful termination claim
and the other involving a quiet title action to
foreclose on a tax lien.
TRANSFER TO DISABILITY
RICHARD B. GELLER
Bar No. 021091; File No. 16-2957
PDJ No. 2016-9125
By order dated Dec. 20, 2016, the presiding
disciplinary judge transferred Richard B. Geller,
Tucson, to temporary disability inactive status.
NATHANIEL J. CARR, III
Bar No. 018753; File Nos. 12-2482, 15-0328
PDJ No. 2016-9041
By the presiding disciplinary judge’s judgment
and order dated Dec. 8, 2016, Nathaniel J. Carr,
III, Phoenix, was suspended from the practice of
law for four years, effective Jan. 1, 2017. Mr. Carr
will be subject to any additional terms imposed if
reinstated. He was assessed $1,532.28 in costs
and expenses for the disciplinary proceeding.
Mr. Carr contracted with the Office of Public
Defense Services (OPDS) to represent indigent
criminal defendants. He was first chair on two
separate death penalty cases and advisory counsel
on a third case. His billings for those services,
open to the public, were replete with statements
of client confidences. Mr. Carr billed for services
specifically excluded by his contract, including
scanning documents and non-substantive motions.
He also billed for work not performed. As first
chair, Mr. Carr failed to oversee the work of the
mitigation expert to assure the work for the mitigation phase of trial was performed. That failure
led, in part, to the court granting petitions for
post-conviction relief and resentencing his clients.
In addition, Mr. Carr was summarily suspended
from the practice of law for failing to submit
proof of his mandatory continuing legal education. He received actual notice of his suspension
but continued to practice law.
Mr. Carr’s misconduct was knowing and there
was actual harm to his clients, the profession, the
legal system, and the public.
Aggravating factors were: selfish or dishonest
motive, pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses,
vulnerability of the victims, and substantial expe-
rience in the practice of law.
Mitigating factors were: absence of a prior
disciplinary record, personal or emotional problems, and delay in disciplinary proceedings.
Mr. Carr violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT., ERs
1. 1 (competence), 1. 5 (fees), 1. 6 (confidentiality
of information), 5. 5 (unauthorized practice of
law), and 8. 4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty,
deceit, fraud or misrepresentation).
LAURENCE KIRK NURMI
Bar No. 020900; File Nos. 15-3024, 15-3288
PDJ No. 2016-9115
By judgment of disbarment dated Nov. 21, 2016,
the presiding disciplinary judge accepted a consent to disbarment filed by Laurence Kirk Nurmi,
Phoenix. Mr. Nurmi’s disbarment was effective
While admitting no misconduct, Mr. Nurmi
did not contest that he violated ethical rules when
he wrote Trapped with Ms. Arias: Part 1 of 3 From
Getting the File to Being Ready for Trial, a book
detailing his representation of Jodi Arias in a
The book was published without Arias’s permission or authority and presented Arias in a negative light. The book included several confidential
discussions between Mr. Nurmi, Arias, and her
family. During his promotion of the book, Nurmi
disclosed facts and circumstances related to his
representation of Arias.
KASEY C. NYE
Bar No. 020610; File No. 15-3110
PDJ No. 2016-9090
By final judgment and order dated Dec. 20,
2016, the presiding disciplinary judge accepted
an agreement for discipline by consent by which
Kasey C. Nye, Tucson, was reprimanded. Mr.
Nye was placed on probation for two years and
ordered to participate in fee arbitration and the
State Bar’s Member Assistance Program. He also
was ordered to pay costs and expenses totaling
Mr. Nye represented a client in a bankruptcy
matter. Mr. Nye agreed to draft certain documents, including a motion for an injunction,
to be filed with the bankruptcy court before a
hearing. He failed to timely draft the documents.
His client subsequently disputed Mr. Nye’s fee.
Despite the fee dispute, Mr. Nye applied his client’s trust account funds to his invoice.
Aggravating factors were bad faith obstruction of disciplinary proceeding by failing to comply with rules/orders of the disciplinary agency,
and substantial experience in the practice of law.
Mitigating factors were absence of a prior
disciplinary record, personal or emotional problems, and character or reputation.
Mr. Nye violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT., ERs
1. 3, 1. 4, 1. 5, 1. 15, 8. 1(b), and 8. 4(d), and Rule
State Bar of Arizona’s Practice Management Advice Program
call 602-340-7332 for free confidential assistance