1.2:330 AUTHORITY RESERVED TO LAWYER

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

1.2:330 Authority Reserved to Lawyer

In both civil and criminal matters, the lawyer has the implied authority to make day-to-day tactical decisions regarding the litigation process and those decisions are binding on the client. Wyatt v. Wehmueller, 167 Ariz. 281, 806 P.2d 870 (1991); Garn v. Garn, 155 Ariz. 156, 745 P.2d 604 (App. 1987). But see Wyatt v. Wehmueller, 167 Ariz. 281, 806 P.2d 870 (1991) (holding that, although an attorney had the requisite authority to file a lis pendens as a tactical measure, the lawyer's failure to notify the client of having done so rendered it inappropriate to subject the client to statutory damages under the wrongful lien statute). The attorney also controls the drafting of all pleadings. Buehman v. Smelker, 50 Ariz. 18, 68 P.2d 96 (1937). An attorney's authority to make tactical decisions includes the authority to stipulate to waive a competency hearing and submit the issue of the defendant's competency to stand trial for decision on the basis of experts' reports. State v. Blier, 113 Ariz. 501, 557 P.2d 1058 (1976); State v. Contreras, 112 Ariz. 358, 542 P.2d 17 (1975). The lawyer also has the authority to elect to proceed to trial before a particular judge. State v. Reid, 114 Ariz. 16, 559 P.2d 136 (1976).

Consistent with this principle, the client is charged with the acts and omissions of the client's attorney in handling litigation matters. Thus, relief under Rule 60 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure from a dismissal for lack of prosecution is not warranted by the fact that the dismissal was due to an attorney's action or inaction. Panzino v. City of Phoenix, 196 Ariz. 442, 999 P.2d 198 (2000); McKernan v. Dupont, 192 Ariz. 550, 968 P.2d 623 (App. 1998); Mission Ins. Co. v. Cash, Sullivan & Cross, 170 Ariz. 105, 822 P.2d 1 (App. 1991).

A slightly different rule is...