ASU® is a registered trademark of, and is used with the permission of, the Arizona Board of Regents.
ASU Alumni Law Group is a separate legal entity.
ASUAlumniLawGroup.org | info@ASUAlumniLawGroup.org | 602.251.3620
How do we teach
family law advocacy?
Stasy Click is “of counsel” to ASU Alumni Law Group where she practices
family law and supervises the family law practice of the Firm. Stasy has
been practicing law for 22 years and is a former Adjunct Professor of Law in
the areas of family law and community property. Stasy frequently teaches
at legal seminars, as well as supervising and training the Firm’s associates
in the area of family law. Stasy believes that training new attorneys in
the fundamentals of family law, trial practice skills, and the caring and
compassion necessary for this area of work bene;ts not only the
lawyers, but also the community.
No group needs more assistance from the legal community than individuals going through a
divorce or a contentious dispute regarding their children. As large as the need is in the
community, there is as large a need in the legal community for quality family law assistance,
and the ASU Alumni Law Group is training its associates to meet this need head on.
We are reinventing how new lawyers learn with
the guidance of top legal talent.
BUSINESS VALUATION SERVICES
Albuquerque | Phoenix
602.730.3600 | redw.com
For thorough, accurate and defensible valuations, rely on REDW’s
• Gift and Estate Tax Planning & Reporting • Mergers and Acquisitions
• Purchase Price Allocations & Financial Reporting • Marital Dissolutions
• Ownership Disputes & Other Litigation • Employee Stock Ownership Plans
• Machinery & Equipment Appraisals • Expert Witness Testimony
the disciplinary agency, vulnerability of victim,
substantial experience in the practice of law, and
indifference to making restitution. There were no
Mr. Solot violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT.,
ERs 1. 2, 1. 3, 1. 4, 3. 2, 8. 1, and 8. 4(d); and Rule
TIMOTHY W. STEADMAN
Bar No. 022708; File Nos. 14-0274, 14-0385, 14-3052,
PDJ No. 2015-9086
By final judgment and order dated Dec. 23, 2015,
the presiding disciplinary judge accepted an agreement for discipline by consent by which Timothy
W. Steadman, Mesa, Ariz., was suspended for 60
days and placed on supervised probation for two
years, upon reinstatement. As a term of probation,
Mr. Steadman will be required to participate in the
State Bar Law Office Management Assistance Program and pay restitution to two former clients
totaling $1987.50. Mr. Steadman also was ordered to pay costs and expenses totaling $1,200.
In count one, Mr. Steadman was hired to represent a client in a divorce proceeding. During the
representation, the parties reconciled and filed a
pro per stipulation to dismiss the case. When the
client requested a refund, Mr. Steadman claimed
that the prepaid fees of $975 were expended on
one letter, research, and discovery.
In count two, Mr. Steadman was hired to collect an outstanding promissory note. While Mr.
Steadman filed pleadings in a family court case,
the court determined that it had no jurisdiction
over the collection matter. Mr. Steadman delayed
filing a civil lawsuit for six months, and although
he served the summons he failed to seek a default
judgment for many months.
In count three, Mr. Steadman was hired to
complete an adoption. After the adoption was
finalized in court, Mr. Steadman was informed
that he failed to submit a form to amend the birth
certificate with the Department of Vital Statistics.
Despite multiple requests, Mr. Steadman failed to
provide the requested form for several months.
In count four, a client hired Mr. Steadman to
set aside a Consent Decree and oppose a request
for an award of attorney fees. Despite his client’s
prodding, Mr. Steadman failed to file any documents or inform his client of his inaction.
The presiding disciplinary judge determined
that three aggravating factors applied: prior disciplinary offenses, a pattern of misconduct, and
multiple offenses. There were two mitigating
factors: absence of a dishonest or selfish motive,
and full and free disclosure to disciplinary board
or cooperative attitude toward proceedings. Mr.
Steadman violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT., ERs
1. 1, 1. 2, 1. 3, 1. 4, 1. 5, 3. 2, and 8. 4(d).
Nearly 17,000 attorneys are eligible to practice
law in Arizona. Many attorneys share the same
names. All discipline reports should be read
carefully for names, addresses and Bar numbers.