Kathi M. Sandweiss

• J.D., Arizona State University School of Law, 1986
• B.A., University of California Los Angeles, 1977

• Arizona, 1986
• U.S. District Court, District of Arizona
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
• United States Supreme Court

• Best Lawyers in America- Appellate Practice - 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025
• Rated AV Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell
• Phoenix Magazine - Top Lawyer, Appellate Law, 2022, 2023, 2024
• Best Lawyers, Women in the Law 2017, 
• Commercial Arbitration Panel Member, American Arbitration Association, 2016
• Rocky Mountain - Emmy Winner, 1982

• Member of American Arbitration Association^®’s Roster of Arbitrators and Mediators
• Faculty member, Arizona Appellate Practice Institute.
• Maricopa County Superior Court, Former Judge Pro Tem
• Arizona State Bar Appellate Practice Section, Past Chair
• Lecturer on a variety of appellate practice issues, including participation in annual Arizona State Bar seminar, "Bankruptcy Ambushes Lurking in the Legal Jungle."
• Organized and moderated 2001 Arizona State Bar convention seminar, "Don't Lose Your Appeal: Traps for the Unwary."
• Lectured on Uniform Commercial Code-Sales, attorney conflicts and disqualification, inheritance rights of adoptive children, the Arizona homestead statute, and more.
• Published articles include "Adoptive Child's Right to Inherit," Arizona Attorney, March 1997; "Preserving the Family Farm in an Urban Age: Recent Changes to the Arizona Judgment Lien and Homestead Statutes," Arizona Attorney, September 1997 and "Foreign Judgments and Community Property," Arizona Attorney, November 2009.
• Temple Chai, Healing Committee
• Master of the Bench, Former Horace Rumpole American Inn of Court
• Girls on the Run, Previously Volunteered as a Running Buddy
• Hospice of the Valley, Former Volunteer
• Wills for Heroes Foundation, Volunteer

• Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Rogers, 239 Ariz. 106, 366 P.3d 583 (App. 2016).
• Hoag v. French, 238 Ariz. 118, 357 P.3d 153 (App. 2015).
• Rogone v.Correia, 236 Arizona. 43, 335 P.3d 1122 (App. 2014), review denied (Apr. 21, 2015). Click here to read decision.
• BT Capital, LLC v. TD Serv. Co. of Arizona, 229 Ariz. 299, 275 P.3d 598 (2012)
• Telesaurus VPC, LLC v. Power, 623 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2010)
• Knappenberger v. City of Phoenix,566 F.3d 936 (9^th Cir. 2009).
• In re Estate of Friedman, 217 Ariz. 548, 177 P.3d 290 (App. 2008)
• Rackmaster Systems, Inc. v. Maderia,219 Ariz. 60, 193 P.3d 314 (App. 2008)
• Austin Shea (Arizona) 7th Street and Van Buren, L.L.C. v. City of Phoenix, 213 Ariz. 385, 142 P.3d 693, 483 (App. 2006)
• Anderson v. Contes, 212 Ariz. 122, 128 P.3d 239 (App. 2006)
• Case Corporation v. Gehrke, 208 Ariz. 140, 91 P.3d 362 (App. 2004)
• Paxson v. Glovitz, 203 Ariz. 63, 50 P.3d 420 (App. 2002), review denied (2002).
• In re Krohn, 203 Ariz. 205, 52 P.3d 774 (2002) (appeared as amicus curiae).
• Matter of Estate of Ryan, 187 Ariz. 311, 928 P.2d 735 (App. 1996).
• Valley National Bank of Arizona v. Kohlase, 182 Ariz. 436, 897 P.2d 738 (App. 1995).
• Mid Kansas v. Dynamic Development Corporation, 167 Ariz. 122, 804 P.2d 1310 (1991).

Fighting for a child's legacy, and making new law. When a child's biological father died, the decedent's parents claimed to be the only heirs because the child had been adopted by his mother's husband. Kathi represented the child in an appeal, resulting in the published decision Matter of Estate of Ryan, 187 Ariz. 311, 928 P.2d 735 (App. 1996), and the determination that the adopted child retained inheritance rights from both biological parents.

Winning Supreme Court backing. The Arizona Supreme Court adopted Kathi's position in a brief she'd written on behalf of her client, in an amicus brief filed in an appeal. In Mid Kansas Federal Sav. and Loan Ass'n of Wichita v. Dynamic Development Corp., 167 Ariz. 122, 804 P.2d 1310 (1991), the court found that the principles of merger and extinguishment did not apply and did not preclude a construction lender, which had acquired title to property at trustee's sale, from bringing a deficiency action against a developer for the balance due on a note.

Defining and Analyzing Complex Community Property Law. A creditor garnished a couples' community property bank account to satisfy an out-of-state judgment against the husband, based upon a personal guaranty signed only by the husband. Kathi represented the couple on appeal, resulting in the published decision Rackmaster v. Maderia, 193 P.3d 314 (App. 2008). The Court concluded that Arizona law bars collection of the guaranteed debt from the community's property, and protects the rights of a spouse who has not signed a personal guaranty.