Attorney/Assemblywoman/Boyd Grad/Candidate for Lieutenant Governor, Lucy Flores, has released a short video on her life story to get her campaign rolling now that she is days away from finding out who her Republican opponent will be. [Ralston Reports]
Surprisingly not a Nevada related story, but this legal related news includes a video of the confrontation leading up to a Florida judge inviting a public defender to go outside where they proceed to fight. [WFTV]
Here’s a little insight into what judicial candidates pay political consultant Dave Thomas for his services. [Las Vegas Tribune]
Yesterday afternoon the page visit meter rolled over to 600,000 page views. We want to say thanks for visiting and participating in this discussion about the Las Vegas legal community. Your comments, tips, and insight are what make this blog. As always, if you have any suggestions or tips, ideas for posts, or even want to do a guest column, let us know.
I am sorry, but I can't bring myself to vote for someone who failed the bar exam, as noted on this Blog and (seemingly) confirmed by her passage in May of 2011 (she graduated from UNLV in May of 2010).
But she turned her life around; transforming herself from a criminal into a productive member of society. Doesn't that entitle her to the Lieutenant Governor position?
I don't know her, or whether she passed the bar, but I know some folks in the Nevada legislature that waited to take the bar due to the ongoing legislative session. I didn't check to see whether the legislature was in session in the summer of 2010. Just making this comment to point out that we may not want to read too much into the 2011 bar pass date.
@ 3:43 – My sarcasm meter was destroyed due to exposure to the internets. Are you seriously saying/implying that ability to pass the bar exam has any correlation to intelligence?
Passing the bar exam has perfect correlation with being able to sit down and give real effort to learn something over a 2-3 month span. Dumb people need to study hard to pass. Not dumb people need to care about the test, but not necessarily study their asses off. I know several people that failed the bar exam. They fall into two categories: (1) dumb and studied, but not exceedingly hard; and (2) not dumb, but didn't study much at all. If Lucy failed, and was distracted because she was campaigning, then maybe she's #2.
Real life happens when you take a bar exam. People are taking bar exams and working. People are taking bar exams when they computer breaks down during the exam.
People have health issues. People are going through divorces. People are dealing with death in their families. People's competence and intelligence are not based on a two and a half day exam. If you are so stupid to think that it does, then you are an asshole.
The armchair psychology here is amazing. 9:07 gave himself/herself away as someone with limited exposure to life and statistics. While I would agree with the general sentiment that those who legitimately spend 2-3 months studying for the bar will likely pass, it is ignorance on par with the Flat Earth Society to posit that "the bar exam has perfect correlation with being able to sit down and give real effort to learn something over a 2-3 month span." As someone who went to a school with a 95+% bar pass rate I can assure you that those who did not pass on the first try could not be so easily lumped into the "dumb and studied" or "not dumb but didn't study" camps (indeed, one of my close friends at school failed the bar on her first try–she's now a senior associate at Sullivan & Cromwell). Success in one's professional career cannot be limited to those who passed the bar on the first attempt. Lucy Flores is living proof.
(Guy who humble-brags about his law school to strangers on an anonymous chat blog while also making generalizations based on one person he knows that failed the bar exam, but clearly isn’t dumb or lazy because she’s at Sullivan & Cromwell)
One person at Sullivan & Cromwell or anywhere else who is demonstrably intelligent and who failed the bar exam on the first try (for whatever reason) is sufficient to refute the absurd assertion that there is a "perfect correlation" between passing the bar on the first try and intelligence or anything else.
Passing a bar exam requires you to know laws, understand facts, and apply the laws to the facts. It is an intellectual endeavor. Now, we all know that exam writers and graders aren't perfect, and there are life distractions (that everyone has, not just those who fail). But saying that bar exam passage has nothing to do with intelligence is silly. You might as well say that performance in sports has nothing to do with athletic ability, because hey, there are some random factors and life distractions.
Honestly, the Nevada Bar is so terribly written that I don't hold it against anybody who fails the first time. Some of the essay questions either deal with law that isn't settled, or are just obviously unaware of basic tenets of the law. The fact that some people don't get the correct answers to a poorly designed test, isn't a reflection of their intelligence.
I don't care about your argument, but I hardly think it's impossible that Sullivan & Cromwell employs some attorneys that are either unintelligent or didn't study hard for the bar. I think that argument will especially fall on deaf ears here in Nevada, where many of us simple small-state lawyers have never heard of a Sullivan & Cromwell.
I took 2 exams. I didn't know what to think after the first one. I felt like I had turned in a solid "B" exam, but I just didn't know, and I was certainly nervous on bar results day. After passing that one, I took a second state's exam. I was much more confident that I passed that one, because I felt equally good about the test, and had the experience of the first exam under my belt.
Even the best firms let a dumb one slip through every now and then. Or hire a person because he or she knew someone.
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 8:24 pm
Very inspiring video, indeed. Using her story to advance her agenda is obvious here. It is also obvious that she loves the youth and believes in their success (right?). If this is the case, though, shouldn't she reconsider running for Lt Governor and go for, say, a School Board position instead? This is where she would have an opportunity to empower the youth. Just a thought.
She hasn't sold me on how she is going to bring businesses and jobs to Nevada NOW. What is her strategic plan? In addition, her resume is not impressive to me. Next!
Her resume is that she is young and Latin with a knack for finding elections that aren't heavily contested. Hutchison will have an absolute field day with her, even with all of her Reid-influenced handlers.
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 9:11 pm
John Cotton left his firm to start his own operation and apparently took everyone with him. Anyone have the dirt?
The website shows Cotton's name on the front page but his bio isn't listed anymore. Formerly Santoro Driggs seems to be shrinking like MAC. They are both shells of what they used to be. Anyone know why? Both have good lawyers there.
MAC has some very good attorneys, but let's be honest. MAC hasn't been hiring (or for the most part, retaining) top quality attorneys since before it became MAC. Several years ago, they used to be on par with the middle tier locally grown firms like the Gordon Silvers and Holland & Harts, etc., but for whatever reason, they have since become more of a bottom tier grinder firm.
Again, night and day. MAC has maintained 35-40 attorneys for the last 10 years. Whats left at whoever driggs? 10?12? Also H&H is a regional firm albeit one who swallowed Hale Lane years ago. But you do raise a good point, what happened to the local firms? Jones Vargas KKB Hale Lane Beckley…all gone
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 9:21 pm
The Bar complaint against Hafter that we have all been waiting for has been filed by one of the Aprea II limited partners. It lights him up for everything he has done to avoid satisfying the judgments out against him and his campaign finance shenanigans. I'm guessing the RJ will have it tomorrow.
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 2:39 am
I was fortunate to pass on the first try back during the Bronze Age, or maybe it was the Iron Age. At any rate, I don't hold it against anyone for failing on the first try. Vote against her for political or policy reasons if you wish, but not because of that.
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 4:12 am
I agree with Hafter's mother:
“He’s not the person he professes to be, and what he did to Judge Vega is typical of him,” she said. “I don’t hate him. I feel sorry for him, because he’s delusional. What I’m doing has nothing to do with animosity. I can’t see him being an impartial judge.”
This is a great article. I think a good 75% of the counsel I go against are delusional. Also, I love when some relatively wealthy Jewish guy plays the victim card. Everyone thinks they’re a victim.
Sad news. I took his gaming law class in law school. He was a great guy. He really seemed to care a lot about the Las Vegas community.
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 11:30 pm
When I took the bar exam, there were partners of well known California firms who were taking the NV bar exam 5-7 times. I guess they are of inferior intelligence, because they did not pass our illustrious bar exam the first time.
I am sorry, but I can't bring myself to vote for someone who failed the bar exam, as noted on this Blog and (seemingly) confirmed by her passage in May of 2011 (she graduated from UNLV in May of 2010).
But she turned her life around; transforming herself from a criminal into a productive member of society. Doesn't that entitle her to the Lieutenant Governor position?
Is she another Harry Reid protege like Dario Herrera?
I don't know her, or whether she passed the bar, but I know some folks in the Nevada legislature that waited to take the bar due to the ongoing legislative session. I didn't check to see whether the legislature was in session in the summer of 2010. Just making this comment to point out that we may not want to read too much into the 2011 bar pass date.
She wasn't elected to the Nevada legislature until November 2010 but perhaps she was already campaigning…
Some of the dumbest people I know passed the bar the first time. Some of the smartest took more than one time to pass.
It will be Flores against Lowden. Flores will win.
@1:37 – Sounds like your ability to judge other peoples' intelligence isn't very accurate.
Mine is a good as yours.
@ 3:43 – My sarcasm meter was destroyed due to exposure to the internets. Are you seriously saying/implying that ability to pass the bar exam has any correlation to intelligence?
Passing the bar exam has perfect correlation with being able to sit down and give real effort to learn something over a 2-3 month span. Dumb people need to study hard to pass. Not dumb people need to care about the test, but not necessarily study their asses off. I know several people that failed the bar exam. They fall into two categories: (1) dumb and studied, but not exceedingly hard; and (2) not dumb, but didn't study much at all. If Lucy failed, and was distracted because she was campaigning, then maybe she's #2.
Real life happens when you take a bar exam. People are taking bar exams and working. People are taking bar exams when they computer breaks down during the exam.
People have health issues. People are going through divorces. People are dealing with death in their families. People's competence and intelligence are not based on a two and a half day exam. If you are so stupid to think that it does, then you are an asshole.
(Guy who makes broad generalizations from one-off anecdotes to justify his bar exam failure)
The armchair psychology here is amazing. 9:07 gave himself/herself away as someone with limited exposure to life and statistics. While I would agree with the general sentiment that those who legitimately spend 2-3 months studying for the bar will likely pass, it is ignorance on par with the Flat Earth Society to posit that "the bar exam has perfect correlation with being able to sit down and give real effort to learn something over a 2-3 month span." As someone who went to a school with a 95+% bar pass rate I can assure you that those who did not pass on the first try could not be so easily lumped into the "dumb and studied" or "not dumb but didn't study" camps (indeed, one of my close friends at school failed the bar on her first try–she's now a senior associate at Sullivan & Cromwell). Success in one's professional career cannot be limited to those who passed the bar on the first attempt. Lucy Flores is living proof.
(Guy who humble-brags about his law school to strangers on an anonymous chat blog while also making generalizations based on one person he knows that failed the bar exam, but clearly isn’t dumb or lazy because she’s at Sullivan & Cromwell)
One person at Sullivan & Cromwell or anywhere else who is demonstrably intelligent and who failed the bar exam on the first try (for whatever reason) is sufficient to refute the absurd assertion that there is a "perfect correlation" between passing the bar on the first try and intelligence or anything else.
Passing a bar exam requires you to know laws, understand facts, and apply the laws to the facts. It is an intellectual endeavor. Now, we all know that exam writers and graders aren't perfect, and there are life distractions (that everyone has, not just those who fail). But saying that bar exam passage has nothing to do with intelligence is silly. You might as well say that performance in sports has nothing to do with athletic ability, because hey, there are some random factors and life distractions.
Honestly, the Nevada Bar is so terribly written that I don't hold it against anybody who fails the first time. Some of the essay questions either deal with law that isn't settled, or are just obviously unaware of basic tenets of the law. The fact that some people don't get the correct answers to a poorly designed test, isn't a reflection of their intelligence.
I don't care about your argument, but I hardly think it's impossible that Sullivan & Cromwell employs some attorneys that are either unintelligent or didn't study hard for the bar. I think that argument will especially fall on deaf ears here in Nevada, where many of us simple small-state lawyers have never heard of a Sullivan & Cromwell.
Did anyone know they passed the bar exam before official results came out? Please explain.
I took 2 exams. I didn't know what to think after the first one. I felt like I had turned in a solid "B" exam, but I just didn't know, and I was certainly nervous on bar results day. After passing that one, I took a second state's exam. I was much more confident that I passed that one, because I felt equally good about the test, and had the experience of the first exam under my belt.
Even the best firms let a dumb one slip through every now and then. Or hire a person because he or she knew someone.
Very inspiring video, indeed. Using her story to advance her agenda is obvious here. It is also obvious that she loves the youth and believes in their success (right?). If this is the case, though, shouldn't she reconsider running for Lt Governor and go for, say, a School Board position instead? This is where she would have an opportunity to empower the youth. Just a thought.
She hasn't sold me on how she is going to bring businesses and jobs to Nevada NOW. What is her strategic plan? In addition, her resume is not impressive to me. Next!
Her resume is that she is young and Latin with a knack for finding elections that aren't heavily contested. Hutchison will have an absolute field day with her, even with all of her Reid-influenced handlers.
John Cotton left his firm to start his own operation and apparently took everyone with him. Anyone have the dirt?
The website shows Cotton's name on the front page but his bio isn't listed anymore. Formerly Santoro Driggs seems to be shrinking like MAC. They are both shells of what they used to be. Anyone know why? Both have good lawyers there.
You can not compare MAC with Whoever Driggs.. night and day.
MAC has some very good attorneys, but let's be honest. MAC hasn't been hiring (or for the most part, retaining) top quality attorneys since before it became MAC. Several years ago, they used to be on par with the middle tier locally grown firms like the Gordon Silvers and Holland & Harts, etc., but for whatever reason, they have since become more of a bottom tier grinder firm.
It's the chef. I blame him. Because how hungry can you really be for the next W when you know you're getting free gourmet cooking every single day?
Again, night and day. MAC has maintained 35-40 attorneys for the last 10 years. Whats left at whoever driggs? 10?12? Also H&H is a regional firm albeit one who swallowed Hale Lane years ago. But you do raise a good point, what happened to the local firms? Jones Vargas KKB Hale Lane Beckley…all gone
The Bar complaint against Hafter that we have all been waiting for has been filed by one of the Aprea II limited partners. It lights him up for everything he has done to avoid satisfying the judgments out against him and his campaign finance shenanigans. I'm guessing the RJ will have it tomorrow.
I was fortunate to pass on the first try back during the Bronze Age, or maybe it was the Iron Age. At any rate, I don't hold it against anyone for failing on the first try. Vote against her for political or policy reasons if you wish, but not because of that.
I agree with Hafter's mother:
“He’s not the person he professes to be, and what he did to Judge Vega is typical of him,” she said. “I don’t hate him. I feel sorry for him, because he’s delusional. What I’m doing has nothing to do with animosity. I can’t see him being an impartial judge.”
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/crime-courts/antisemitism-claims-not-first-made-las-vegas-attorney
This is a great article. I think a good 75% of the counsel I go against are delusional. Also, I love when some relatively wealthy Jewish guy plays the victim card. Everyone thinks they’re a victim.
RJ reporting Bob Faiss passed away
Sad news. I took his gaming law class in law school. He was a great guy. He really seemed to care a lot about the Las Vegas community.
When I took the bar exam, there were partners of well known California firms who were taking the NV bar exam 5-7 times. I guess they are of inferior intelligence, because they did not pass our illustrious bar exam the first time.
No, some likely arrogantly assumed they were so brilliant that they didn't have to put any effort into preparation.