Under Rule 10, which statement about ex parte contact is correct?

Study for the Arizona Family Law and Paralegal Certification Exam. Utilize flashcards and multiple-choice questions, complemented by hints and explanations for each question. Prepare confidently for your exam!

Ex parte contact means a lawyer speaking with the court without the other party being present. The rule sets a default prohibition on such communications, allowing them only when the law or court rules specifically authorize them. This protects fairness by ensuring both sides have a chance to be heard and that the court isn’t influenced by one side’s private communications. In practice, you’d typically use ex parte contact only for narrowly defined circumstances sanctioned by law—often emergency relief or other court-approved situations—and you must follow the required procedures (such as providing notice to the other side when possible and explaining the need for ex parte relief). That adherence to authorized exceptions is why the correct statement is that the attorney may not engage in ex parte contact with the court except as authorized by law. The other options imply blanket permission, mandatory ex parte contact, or a total prohibition without exceptions, which don’t align with the rule’s allowance for lawful exceptions.