Margo R. Casselman
Margo Casselman has experience in a wide range of litigation matters. Before joining the firm, Margo clerked for the Honorable David G. Campbell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and the Honorable Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
She graduated summa cum laude from the University of Arizona law school, where she received the class of 2017 Highest Academic Achievement Award. Margo also won #1 oral advocate in the region at the ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition (Boston). She has a business background and worked for an international tech company before pursuing her law degree.
Areas of focus
Education & Credentials
Education
- University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif, Articles Editor, Arizona Law Review, 2017
- Arizona State University, B.A., Business, summa cum laude, Certificate in International Business, 2014
Bar and Court Admissions
-
Arizona
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Clerkships
- Hon. Mary H. Murguia, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Hon. David G. Campbell, U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Professional Recognition
Listed as a "Rising Star" by Southwest Super Lawyers, 2022-2024
Insights
News
Professional Experience
Vince Leach, et al. v. Katie Hobbs, Arizona Secretary of State, et al.
Supreme Court of Arizona
Co-counsel for amicus curiae Kathy Hoffman, et al. in support of Arizonans Fed Up With Failing Healthcare's appeal from superior court's decision determining that Arizonans Fed Up With Failing Healthcare did not submit a sufficient number of valid signatures in support of initiative petition and that the 100-word description required by A.R.S. § 19-102(A) was misleading and confusing and therefore refused to certify that initiative for the 2020 general election ballot. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the superior court on the grounds that Arizonans Fed Up With Failing Healthcare did not submit a sufficient number of valid signatures in support of initiative petition but declined to rule on whether the 100-word description was in compliance with A.R.S. § 19-102(A); Justice Bolick wrote a concurring opinion stating that the 100-word description was not in compliance with A.R.S. § 19-102(A). (Decided March 31, 2021, No. CV-20-0233-AP/EL) ___ Ariz. ___, ___ P.3d ___ (2021)