- law dawg
- 41 Comments
- 1789 Views
- Complaints allege Judges Erika Mendoza and Tina Talim are in violation of campaign finance laws. [Nevada Current]
Presidents Day Weekend 2025
This is the dangerous idea that threatens America. When we…
Dry Streak Ends
I would break into Tiffany's at midnight. Do I go…
Job Tips: Using AI
I am the person who posted the AI summary yesterday.…
Job Tips: Using AI
https://newrepublic.com/post/191313/donald-trump-ally-supreme-court-overturn-press-protection Steve Wynn is a massive piece of shit.
Presidents Day Weekend 2025
“If no lawyer within earshot of the President is willing…
With early voting here, we thought we would dedicate one last post to the 2024 Judic ..
Carnac the Magnificent says, re today’s title: “What is Hooge’s wet dream that he wishes he were in?”
Question for all: If a judicial candidate cannot conduct thorough legal research on how the law/regulation should be interpreted or followed, how are they having the business on being a Judge?
I think they should not.
#bringbackthecivilbench
Reading the article, sounds to me like they did exactly what they should have done. They got an opinion from the SOS. Four judges did the same thing. All relied on SOS.
But also, that paralegal just got her firm conflicted off from all their courtrooms.
and to be fair, the NV SOS office is already a bit of a sh*tshow. Wouldn’t surprise me in the least if they gave contradictory information.
Wow, Great legal minds: “Mendoza and Talim, both sitting judges, did not respond when asked to cite a law that allows candidates in a special election to exceed the $5,000 maximum contribution from an individual or entity. ”
The Secretary of State’s campaign guide, says in bold print: “It is important to note that this guide is for general information only. It does not have the force and effect of Nevada law, regulation, or rule.”
I looked at the law cited in the complaint, seems pretty clear to me that what they did was out of line. Both Talim and Mendoza seem to have a boatload of $$ on hand, why not give back the excess “in an abundance of caution” and call it a day?
What law? There isn’t a law on point about special elections. Hence, the clusterfuck. Not to mention seebock has, in writing, confirmation from the SoS office that special election is 10k. Literally in writing.
There is no law. Law says $5000 for the primaries and $5000 for the general. The law addresses general elections. This is why candidates sought guidance and were told 5+5. I am not voting for either Talim or Mendoza; however there are actual valid reasons to not vote them other than this.
what are the valid reasons?
No civil experience, lack of years of experience compared to their opponents, temperament in Mendoza’s case, lack of ability to make decisive rulings in Talim’s case. They are not the best candidates in their respective races. But the campaign finance allegations are red herrings.
We can say that about the law firms who contributed to their campaigns?
There’s a thing called first amendment and also, peremptory challenges.
Sounds like you’re an apologist and we know who you voted for judges lol.
1st amendment doesn’t protect you from getting fired from a private law firm. And What do peremptory challenges have to do with anything here?
Talim’s lack of conscientiousness to perform basic legal research beyond reliance on a candidate guide, shows her legal abilities are lacking: The Secretary of State’s campaign guide, says in bold print: “It is important to note that this guide is for general information only. It does not have the force and effect of Nevada law, regulation, or rule.” So in legal citations in briefs, it will be okay to rely on headnotes to summarize a case holding. Or, better yet, just cite Tom Letizia.
I am not supporting either of these candidates. However they got not only direct answers from the SoS but the SoS puts out an FAQ that is at best ambiguous and at worst supports their positions.
“Alan has certainly pretty much disqualified himself over the last 10 years with some really indefensible positions that he’s taken and certainly in interviews with the RJ that are now in print, he continues to take some really indefensible positions about society, about women, about people of color, it’s about people who are gay.” From Ralston.
Yes, lets trust the notorious lefty Ralston for his judicial recommendations.
🙄
Coffing and Lebfevre!
Yes, please!
Coffing, sure. But Alan… seriously?
Where is this written?
https://thenevadaindependent.com/elections/2024/races/judicial/8th-dc-dept-14
Thank you!
This was garbage writing from Ralston.
I like Jon and support the Indy. This recommendation was pure tripe with this thumb on the scale.
In the race for 27 the text was quotes from the panel the did the evaluations, not from Ralston. What was said about Mendoza by co-workers and the defense bar was scathing and if half is true, disqualifying.https://thenevadaindependent.com/elections/2024/races/judicial/8th-dc-dept-27
Has anyone else had a similar experience with Mendoza?
The panel is right about Mendoza. This is her well known reputation around the courthouse.
She’s holding it together for the 90 day election. Once she wins, just see how her temperament changes.
Or, you could just vote for Coffing and call it a day.
From your mouth to God’s Ear.
Just read the Indy article. I do not recall ever seeing such a blunt and scathing review as the one regarding Mendoza. I had no idea, but I also am not a DA or criminal attorney.
It’s the internet, you can say fuck.
Ralston leans left, so what?
The most annoying thing about him is how insecure he is. There’s no reason for it, he’s intelligent and highly accomplished.
No argument. But I do not take election recommendations from notorious lefties.
We’ll never know who said what, but it looks like these were comments from one of Dayvid Figler, Colby Williams, David Westbrook, Caleb Green, Todd Bice and Bailey Bortolin.
I am one of the comment authors (1:34 PM). Do I get to be Todd Bice? I call being Todd Bice!
Guess you can take all that with a grain of salt. I dont know Mendoza and personally have nothing against her, except that she has zero civil experience.
But, I am a Coffing guy through and through. I have known him personally for well over 20 years and despite his being an absolutely badass litigator, his demeanor will will clean and sober.
Smart enough to not take any bullshit and cool enough to get it done quickly. Frankly he made MAC what it was and I have to believe that he is sorely missed there.
We will be lucky to have him.
“We will be lucky to have him.”
Convince me Clark County deserves him.
That’s actually a fair statement. While we may not deserve him, we would, in fact be LUCKY to have him.
This is in line with what I’ve heard about her too, especially the part about making things personal.
We get it, Alan.
who is excited for some Ralston tears over the next 2 weeks
I say keep the hot judges.