Angel’s Bar Complaint Services
Kind, professional help with:
• Initial Bar inquiries
• State Bar complaints
• Disciplinary Panel appeals
• Reinstatement appeals
• Expert writing
We believe that good lawyers are capable of effectively
representing themselves (with help) in most State Bar
disciplinary proceedings. Retained ethics lawyers
handle your case for the money and may wish to
maintain a friendly relationship with opposing State Bar
Counsel. Let us help you defend your standing as an
ethical attorney. The three of us will act as a team with
you the decisionmaker.
W.M., Phoenix, February 2017 Lisajen
“Lisa helped me save my
dignity, my law practice,
and my enjoyment of life.”
an Arizona law firm
go to: www.azbar.org/azattorney
44-1841 and 44-1842 by offering or selling
unregistered securities in the form of promissory
notes and/or investment contracts as an unregistered securities salesman and dealer; and (c)
A.R.S. § 44-3151 by transacting business in Arizona as an unlicensed investment advisor representative and investment adviser.
The ACC order required Mr. Krauser, and a
business he had established to invest funds on
behalf of his marital community, to permanently
cease and desist from violating the Securities Act
of Arizona and the Arizona Investment Management Act. He was also required to pay restitution and an administrative penalty. Although Mr.
Krauser filed for bankruptcy relief, he eventually
repaid all three people the principal amount that
they had given him. While interacting with two
of the three investors, Mr. Krauser made some
statements in email messages that were untrue or
not entirely accurate.
Aggravating factors: dishonest or selfish motive, vulnerability of the victims, and substantial
experience in the practice of law.
Mitigating factors: absence of a prior disciplinary record, personal or emotional problems,
timely good faith effort to make restitution, full
disclosure and cooperative attitude toward disciplinary proceedings, character or reputation, delay in the disciplinary proceedings, imposition of
other penalties or sanctions, and remorse.
Mr. Krauser violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT.,
ER 8. 4(c).
WILLIAM TATTNALL RUSH
Bar No. 025228; File Nos. 15-2534, 15-2540, 15-2863,
15-2928, 16-0333, 16-0340, 16-0505, 16-0538
PDJ No. 2016-9087
By order of the presiding disciplinary judge dated
Jan. 26, 2017, William Tattnall Rush, Scottsdale,
was disbarred. He was ordered to pay restitution
and the costs and expenses of the disciplinary
proceeding totaling $3,244.81.
The eight-count complaint filed against Mr.
Rush was deemed admitted by default. Most
counts dealt exclusively with Rush’s representation of individual clients in family law cases. In
general, Mr. Rush failed to diligently represent
clients, failed to respond to discovery requests,
failed to adequately communicate with his clients
and one opposing counsel, charged an unreasonable fee by failing to refund unearned fees, failed
to provide his clients with accountings of his
fees, failed to return documents and other items
given to him by his clients, failed to provide his
clients or their subsequent counsel with the files
he maintained on their behalf, and failed to comply with court orders and rules regarding discovery and other matters. In some cases, Mr. Rush
abandoned his clients. In addition, Mr. Rush
failed to respond during the State Bar’s investigation into his conduct and failed to file an
answer to the formal complaint.