Cochise County supervisors replace outside counsel, direct new attorney to seek continuance in LaChance Supreme Court petition

BISBEE, Ariz., Jan. 6, 2025 — The Cochise County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to end legal representation by Craig Morgan of the law firm Sherman & Howard in the matter of Daniel LaChance et al v. Cochise County, CV24-0150-PR, retained attorney Timothy Lasota to represent the county in that case, and directed Lasota to file a motion seeking a continuance of the county’s petition for review before the Arizona Supreme Court.

The board conducted the action during a specially noticed session that included an executive session under Arizona law. Supervisor Antinori moved to terminate Morgan’s representation and his contract; the motion was seconded and passed by voice vote. Antinori then moved to retain Lasota; that motion also passed by voice vote. After returning from executive session, the board moved — with a vote of “aye” recorded and the chair voting aye — to direct Lasota to file a motion seeking a continuance in the Supreme Court petition.

The actions follow a conflict-of-interest disclosure by Miss Zuko, an attorney who told the board she had contacted the State Bar ethics hotline and was advised she had a conflict under ethical rule 1.7(a)(2) because “my husband is the trial judge.” Zuko said the conflict is imputed to her staff under ethical rule 1.10 and identified Paul Correa as among the staff affected. "I was advised that pursuant to ethical rule 1.7 a 2, I have a conflict of interest on this matter... my husband is the trial judge... pursuant to ethical rule 1.10, this conflict of interest is imputed to my staff, including Mister Correa," Miss Zuko said.

Paul Correa, who spoke during the meeting, asked that the record note when he and Miss Zuko left the executive session. "I would just, recommend that somebody scribble a note down so when you go out of executive session that that's put on the record that, Mister Correa and Mizuko left," Correa said. The board recessed to executive session and later returned to the public meeting to make the recorded motions.

All actions recorded at the meeting were taken as motions on the record and approved by voice vote. The board did not record any dissenting votes in the public record during the session.

The case at issue is listed on the record as Daniel LaChance et al v. Cochise County et al, CV24-0150-PR. County documents presented at the meeting show Morgan’s association with the law firm Sherman & Howard; Lasota was identified on the record as the attorney the board voted to retain and to whom the board directed the continuance request.

The board opened the special meeting at 9 a.m. in the Board of Supervisors executive conference room, with remote attendance available by Microsoft Teams. The board announced its next scheduled meeting for Jan. 7, 2025, with a 9 a.m. swearing-in and a 10 a.m. regular meeting. The board adjourned after the motions were recorded.