An in-depth investigation by The Arizona Republic has found that Arizona\u2019s pioneering program allowing nonlawyers to own law firms \u2014 a reform long championed by access-to-justice advocates \u2014 has become riddled with consumer complaints, legal loopholes, financial conflicts of interest and inadequate oversight. In a series of investigative articles, Republic journalist Laura Gersony paints a [\u2026]<\/p>\n
An in-depth investigation by The Arizona Republic<\/em> has found that Arizona\u2019s pioneering program allowing nonlawyers to own law firms \u2014 a reform long championed by access-to-justice advocates \u2014 has become riddled with consumer complaints, legal loopholes, financial conflicts of interest and inadequate oversight.<\/p>\n In a series of investigative articles, Republic<\/em> journalist Laura Gersony paints a troubling picture of the state\u2019s Alternative Business Structures program, which the Arizona Supreme Court approved in 2021<\/a> to allow nonlawyers to own law firms. The program was intended to make legal services cheaper and more accessible for Arizona residents. Instead, the Republic<\/em> found, it has in many cases attracted profit-focused investors whose firms have generated a trail of consumer complaints across the country.<\/p>\n Related LawNext episode: Supreme Court Justice Ann Timmer on Arizona\u2019s Sweeping Regulatory Reforms<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The findings present a sharp contrast to a comprehensive Stanford Law School study I reported on last June<\/a>, which found \u201cremarkably little evidence of consumer harm\u201d from the Arizona reforms and similar reforms in Utah.<\/p>\n That study, by the Stanford Center on the Legal Profession, reported that through April 2025, Utah had only 20 consumer complaints across all sandbox entities, and that the two Arizona ABS entities that faced formal disciplinary action involved procedural and oversight issues rather than systematic consumer harm.<\/p>\n The Republic<\/em> investigation, however, tells a different story, one focused on specific firms and the on-the-ground experiences of consumers rather than aggregate data.<\/p>\n In the first installment of the series, \u201cArizona lets investors own law firms. Consumers pay the price<\/a>,\u201d Gersony reports that the ABS program has become an epicenter for consumer complaints, with clients across the United States saying they were mistreated, misled, or \u2014 in the words of a lawsuit against one firm \u2014 outright \u201cscammed.\u201d<\/p>\n The investigation found that more than a dozen licensees have been accused of harming their clients or violating consumer protction laws. Several licensees are accused of targeting vulnerable people, such as those in financial distress. Allegations range from illegal robo-calling to what Alabama prosecutors have called a deceptive scheme that \u201ccommoditized\u201d car accident victims in one of the poorest states in the country.<\/p>\n The Republic<\/em> also found significant conflicts of interest within the program\u2019s oversight structure. Several members of the committee that advises the Supreme Court on each licensing decision also make money counseling the firms applying for the program. An ethics expert told the Republic\u2019s<\/em> reporter that they should step down.<\/p>\n Despite these issues, just two firms have received mild discipline, according to the Republic<\/em>. One firm may lose its license, though the decision is not yet final, the Republic<\/em> said.<\/p>\n Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Timmer stood by the program, Gersony reports, asserting that any reform will have both benefits and costs. She took issue with any suggestion that the court should do more to police misconduct by licensees.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s unrealistic to think that we can monitor people all the time,\u201d Timmer told the Republic<\/em>. \u201cWe don\u2019t have the capacity to do that.\u201d<\/p>\n In a second article, \u201cLoopholes let Arizona law firm experiment spread nationwide<\/a>,\u201d Gersony reports on how the ABS program, which was intended to benefit Arizona residents, has effectively spread nationwide.<\/p>\n At least half of the Arizona licensees do business in other states, according to the Republic\u2019s<\/em> review. Only one-tenth of the firms specifically emphasize Arizona on their website or marketing materials. According to the Republic, firms are using their Arizona licenses to operate what are essentially nationwide practices, including some that function more like call centers, farming out cases across the country while doing little legal work themselves.<\/p>\n The article profiles reality TV star Joe Gorga of \u201cReal Housewives of New Jersey,\u201d who owns an Arizona-licensed personal injury firm that operates nationwide through billboards and advertising \u2014 despite having no connection to Arizona and not being a lawyer himself.<\/p>\n In Alabama, prosecutors are probing an Arizona-licensed firm\u2019s connection with what they have called a deceptive scheme. In Texas, a woman settled with another Arizona firm she accused of clogging up her personal cell phone with illegal robo-calls and automated text messages. And in California, a federal judge accused a third licensed firm of trying to make a \u201cquick buck\u201d by luring authors out of a class-action settlement under misleading conditions.<\/p>\nConsumer Complaints and Misconduct<\/h3>\n
Out-of-State Spillover<\/h3>\n
Regulatory Response<\/h3>\n