- law dawg
- 16 Comments
- 982 Views
- Attorney challenges newly appointed district court judge, questions appointment process. [Nevada Current]
2024 Judicial Election #10
- 2024 Judicial Election
- Posted on 2 days ago
Most Voted Comments
Active Comment Threads
Recent Comments
Sour grapes. If you wanted to be considered you should have submitted an application. A month is not a short period of time to consider if you want to be running or not. What are we supposed to do if only 1 person applies to be considered for a Judge? Keep the seat open until we find any other 2 people and force them to submit their applications?
Although I agree with his general point that a civil litigator is often better suited for a Judge position wherein they handle a heavy civil litigation load, but that aside, if you are a civil litigator wanting to be a Judge, submit your application timely.
Yeah, how dare that pesky Constitution get in the way of effing progress? I mean what are we supposed to do? Comply? Extend the application deadline and let everyone know that its open?
Perish the thought that the NCJS should do its fucking job by actually doing figuring out a way to comply with the Constitution instead of passing a rule to bypass it. FFS, they could “pass a rule” that previous applicants for any department could reapply by signing a one page declaration and using their last application. Boom, three applicants in 10 seconds.
Like really, how hard is it?
WE ALL SCREAM ABOUT “QUALIFIED” CANDIDATES ON THIS BLOG AND THEN WE GET THIS CRAP. HOW DOES A GODD CIVIL LITIGATOR, APPLY FOR A OPEN SPOT, GIVE UP A PRACTICE AND THEN LOSE THE ELECTION? DO YOU THINK TALIM WILL NOT BE WELCOMED BACK THE THE DA’S OFFICE IF SHE LOSES? OF COURSE SHE WILL. AT THE SAME TIME SHE IS A GOOD PERSON AND, BY ALL ACCOUNTS A FINE PROSECUTOR. BUT IN A CIVIL DEPT? OF COURSE NO ONE APPLIES IN THIS SIITUATION, ASK ATKINSON BALLUS AND OTHER WHO PROBABLY REGRET THEIR SHORT TERM ON THE BENCH VERSES LONG TERM PRACTICES. SORRY NOT TRYING TO SHOUT, KEYBOARD ISSUE….
TL:DR You mad bro?
Bro, Did you read the “sorry not trying to shout, keyboard issue/”
Bruh. Did you not see the TL:DR?
Let’s say you’re a white male making $300k+ in private practice. Why in the fuck would you ever apply to be a judge? You will lose to any female candidate in the next election. And for a couple of years you live on first year associate wages to boot.
Appointing female DAs has become dogmatic. There were no other applicants because everyone knows what the outcome will be. Why waste time on an application?
I agree with some of what you are saying. But maybe I am naive and think that the desire to serve means something more than money. Hopefully if you are making 300k a year you have made some plans and can afford a pay cut. (I can guarantee that some the people mentioned in this context make multiples of 300k a year) but for a PD or DA you get on the bench to keep up the PERS gravy train. Talim is no doubt a good person, but do you know what my clients have to pay for her on the job training? Spread the word these votes matter.
I agree if you are putting yourself to serve it means for greater good beyond high level 6 figures.
Also, not sure about “good” person part LOL. She alienated her kids against their father and had them change their last name to Talim and that’s not all of it. Talk about “temperament.” Doesn’t belong on the bench.
Darn it. It was better to rush an appointment rather than risk that the election for 14 might have gone to an election, so close to the election!
It’s better to let the expert pickers do the picking.
What’s a constitutional rule between friends!
Your tax dollars at work.
“The Nevada Judicial Commission, which is overseen by the Nevada Supreme Court and chaired by Chief Justice Elissa Cadish, contracted the Ferraro Group to provide public relations. The Ferraro Group provided the Current with a copy of the rule but did not respond to inquiries about its efficacy in ensuring an apolitical process. “
So much transparency!
Decisions of the commission need not be unanimous. NO way the CJ participated in the unconstitutional work around.
The bar violated it own policy in permitting unlimited re-appointments to one of its selection seats, and the result is a “vice-chairperson” who has usurped power.
On both selection and discipline, the “public members” are sadly, spectators.
They are pawns and puddy in the hands of the “old hand.”
The unwillingness of talented civil lawyers to apply, circles back to the role of the too-long termed “vice-chairman.”
The path to appointment lies through the vice, and if you’re not on his list……you get blacklisted.