Only nine years younger than the state of Arizona itself, Gust
Rosenfeld was the child of a merger between two Phoenix firms as
Kibbey, Bennett, Gust and Smith. The firm rose to prominence over
the next century, and since 1992, the firm has been known by its
current name. With offices in Phoenix and Tucson, Gust Rosenfeld is
home to over 60 lawyers and serves clients the likes of the Fortune
IN THE NEWS
Gust Rosenfeld represented Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities
District ("District") in its successful efforts to convince a
multi-billion dollar company to locate its technology division
within the District. Gust Rosenfeld will be involved in the
designing, constructing and leasing of the $50 Million facility.
Gust Rosenfeld also represented the District in its successful sale
of the long dormant "Arena Site," the buyer has committed to
developing the property with a hotel, residential and retail space.
To facilitate this development the District is also moving the
existing bus terminal to a new modern location which the District
is designing, constructing and leasing.
Gust Rosenfeld served as bond counsel on the $45,460,000 Central
Arizona Water Conservation District (Central Arizona Project) Water
Delivery O&M Revenue Bonds, Series 2016 financing for
infrastructure and electric utility improvements to the Central
Arizona Project canal system.
Gust Rosenfeld's commitment to pro bono service was
recently demonstrated by its successful representation of a party
before the Arizona Supreme Court. In re Marriage of
Howell, 238 Ariz. 407 (2015), held that a federal statute does
not preempt a state court's authority to order a retired veteran to
indemnify an ex-spouse for a reduction of her share of military
retirement pay caused by the veteran's election to collect
service-related disability benefits, and that a state statute
prohibiting indemnification does not apply to a previously vested
division of retirement pay. Gust's representation now continues
before the United States Supreme Court.
Gust Rosenfeld obtained summary judgment for Douglas
Unified School District when a former teacher alleged age
discrimination. After the school district dismissed the teacher,
the teacher sued the school district claiming age discrimination.
As part of the summary judgment the court ordered the teacher to
repay the school district for costs incurred in the litigation.