- Quickdraw McLaw
- 58 Comments
- 145 Views
- From a press release:
The United States District Court for the District of Nevada announces the pending retirement of United States Magistrate Judge George W. Foley, Jr. and United States Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman, Jr. After 14 years of dedicated service to the Court, United States Magistrate Judge George W. Foley, Jr. will be retiring on August 5, 2019. Judge Foley has diligently served as a Magistrate Judge in the District of Nevada since August 4, 2005. In addition, after eight years of dedicated service to the Court, United States Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman, Jr. will be retiring on August 4, 2019. Judge Hoffman has diligently served as a Magistrate Judge in the District of Nevada since August 5, 2011.
The Court extends its gratitude to Judge Foley and Judge Hoffman for their years of service to the federal judiciary and to the community. Applications for the position of United States magistrate judge to fill these vacancies will be available on the Court’s website nvd.uscourts.gov in the fall of 2018.
- An alleged con man decided to skip sentencing and lose his plea deal. [RJ]
- Judge Ron Israel made a favorable ruling for the AP potentially allowing them to recover their fees under anti-SLAPP laws against Steve Wynn. [USNews]
- Nevada courts rely on criminalized traffic tickets. [Nevada Current]
Lynn Goya, county clerk, was popped for a DUI.
Have to wash all those rubber chicken dinners down with something.
Have you noticed that is the third negative piece against a Democratic candidate from the RJ? It's weird, almost like Sheldon wants to advance his views through his newspaper…
Nothing negative about reporting a DUI. It is news worthy. Goya needs to go ya!
Much less surprising when you match the political leanings of the editors to what makes it to print.
Yeah, I suppose it's marginally newsworthy, but ask yourself how much the public cares about the county clerk and their affairs. Then ask yourself whether the same story would have been published about a flag pin wearing member of the GOP. I doubt it.
What flag?
So, the arrest was in December of 2017, case finalized in February of 2018 with a reckless driving plea and NOW it's news?
Worse that she was still an officer of the Court. I wonder if Cortez Masto will pull her endorsement of Goiter or Goya.
She is friends with Craig Friedberg and Aaron Ford. Ah, no thanks. Both are pretty bad.
Well played 1:47. In this instance I'll say American Flag.
1:47 is the top post of the day.
Did I do a double take, or did the article say Goya was drinking and drove with only one good hand? Um, Toonces the cat would drive better than that woman.
Goya is pals with Ford and Howard, Judge Cadish's husband. Interesting crowd.
I will get in the car with Toonces over the others for $700.
I am not going to say who I am, but I am reading some very fine legal writing on an appeal. It is refreshing.
Pics or it didn't happen
The writing in the Dozier Appeal is pretty high quality stuff from the Drug Makers.
It is Lieu. Dan, the best appellate lawyer ever, according to Claggett.
When you figure one of the drug makers has no less than 8 lawyers on their brief, four from Latham and Watkins, I bet that brief was an expensive pig to write. 200k? You figure even a conference call with eight lawyers charging anywhere from 450 to 1500 per hour…
That's probably not far off. Just think about that as a government lawyer as you're paid your 8 grand a month and only have a week to spend on a brief. $200,000 vs. $2,000. May the odds be ever in your favor.
Interestingly it is NOT Lt. Dan. Lewis & Roca entered their appearance and claimed that the Reid Boys and Kristen Martini are writing their brief.
12:13, that logic only applies at Bulla's chambers of naughty. Leave your phones at the door.
This is funny.
County Clerk, Lynn Goya, being arrested for D.U.I., certainly would appear to be something that her opponent in this year's election, Mindie Lloyd(who is Judge Kephart's J,E.A.) can effectively use against her.
On the other hand, it may not appear to be as huge an election issue as it may at first appear. First, the positon of County Clerk is obscure to the media and voting public, and of no particular interest. People view it as merely a bureaucratic function, as opposed to some policy-making leadership type political office. So, after one token article about the arrest(which most people will not see) it will receive no further significant coverage.
Secondly, since the media therefore will not make a huge deal of it beyond a brief article or two, Mindie Lloyd would need to pursue the issue herself in mailers and broadcast ads, and I'm not sure her campaign has the huge finances to do so.
So, although this would be a big issue for a Senator or Governor's race, I just don't see it as being that huge on account of the nature of the race.
But I may very well be wrong. I'd like to know what others think.
I have some thoughts. #1 if you google her opponent Mindie lots of not so flattering results appear on the first page including some articles about her previous attempts to be elected. #2 This should be of more interest, being the clerk pays $114k a year apparently which sounds like a lot for basically not doing anything.
If you were around in the Loretta Bowman days, you would know that the Clerk can make your life miserable.
First, the Loretta Bowman days were nothing compared to Shirley Parraguirre thinking she was God.
Second both Shirley and Loretta held the position when "County Clerk" meant Clerk of the Court and had significant responsibility. Since the divorcing of the Clerk of the Court from the County Clerk, the County Clerk position is really de facto marriage/dba commissioner.
Clerks take an oath, so I care. I don't vote for drunks. It was not Minddy or Minddy who brought it up. It was the RJ.
I hope Goya is their with her bestie, Cortez Madto, imbibing as never imbibed, at the Y2k, I mean CPK party.
I was in court the day Judge Goldman sentenced Loretta Bowman to jail because one of her clerks entered a pleading after a default had been entered.
Shirley Parraguirre thought she was God when she was a JEA for a district court judge. Why anyone voted for her was baffling. She never changed her spots.
I was there when Judge Goldman put the repairman who was fixing the roof in jail for making too much noise.
Yes, after the guy on the roof was incarcerated, the Nevada Supreme Court stepped in. The story goes that the chief justice called Goldman and said, "Paul, what is going on down there?" Goldman replied, "F you!" That was the end of Paul Goldman's judicial career. The Court even wrote a derogatory opinion about Goldman after he had been killed in a car accident.
Those brakes didn't fail on their own
It struck me that the Clerk insisting she just nursed one cocktail over a long dinner evening, which presumes that she ate which helped absorb the alcohol, was complete b.s.
There is no way one drink would lead to a .116 reading. Plus the other circumstances incident to the arrest, and description of her driving and actions, appearance and speech once pulled over, makes it even more clear her version is b.s.
And then the paper quotes John Watkins, who also clearly seems to think it's b.s., but wisely chooses to be a little careful and allows for the possibility of a lab contamination or testing error.
She asks that she be judged on her entire record rather than this one incident. If that be the case, simply acknowledge(without offering details) that she made a bad mistake, won't repeat it, and ask the public to look to other factors, including her entire record. Instead, she insists on insulting everyone's intelligence, by insisting that she only had one cocktail, and then asks everyone to overlook it and judge her on her entire record.
This seems to be a common trend when public officials are popped for DUI. People who have had 6 or 8 drinks should just shut up and say nothing, or say something vague and general. I don't understand this obsession where they seem to think: (1) I must be an idiot and offer details to the media; and(2) When I do so, and admit my mistake, I will actually prove I have no accountability by telling the transparent lie that I only had one drink(occasionally, they will admit to two drinks).
And this is a phenomenon with non-public people as well. They seem to think it helps them, and makes them appear to be more honest to the police, if they admit to drinking but claim only one drink(or at most two) no matter how high their reading is. Again, how about shut up till you speak to your lawyer?
Goya presumably has a lawyer, as well as (presumably) competent campaign managers. Are we to believe hey told her to make public statements about admitting to drinking but then lie and claim it was only one drink, despite the .116 reading and her being unable to walk?
It sounds, instead, like she will ignore any rational advice, and she just assumes that the community is a pack of dummies and that she is some great public official with the ability to manipulate and persuade the unwashed masses to believe whatever comes out of her mouth.
I don't like what I am seeing here. But one poster said to check out Mindie Lloyd as there are issues there as well, so I will do so. Could be a race worth skipping on the ballot.
2:22-It can get worse than the idiots who insist on admitting the matter, or even making public statements to the media, but then only claim one drink. How about the morons who insist on speaking to the papers while their case is pending(at least Goya apparently waited till her matter was negotiated and resolved).
And then these morons offer something even more ludicrous than they just had one or two drinks. They insist that they drank no alcoholic beverages, but that earlier in the week they took a teaspoon of cough medicine for a flu, and the alcohol from that medicine is what resulted in someone testing more than twice the legal limit.
Minndie Lloyd is Kephardt's JEA btw. She's not necessarily a paragon of propriety. As noted she's got some shenanigans posted on the inter webs.
Speaking of appellate work, I have a general consensus question. We have filed our Opening Brief. Respondent asked for an extension which was granted pro forma. Respondent asked for a second extension, claiming to be too busy to write it. We did not take a position. It was granted. Respondent asked for a third continuance claiming to be too busy; our client started getting itchy about the whole thing. However before we could decide to take a position the Supremes granted it with an admonition that this would be the last extension and workload is not a valid reason for an extension.
We just got word that Respondent has asked for a fourth extension (based on workload). Do you oppose it and risk looking like a dick when you know the Supreme Court is going to hear it on the merits? Or do you sit idly by and hope the Supremes take it upon themselves sua sponte to take a pound of flesh?
I would follow the second option and not oppose the fourth extension request, instead letting the Supreme Court decide whether to grant it without having you weigh in.
I do a lot of appellate work. I agree with 1:59.
I would probably file a one-page opposition and remind the court of the previous extensions and simply state that any further requests (including the current one) are unwarranted.
I don't do appellate work but if it is ignored couldn't the client come back and say you weren't doing your job (malpractice, ethics, etc.)?
Is this a civil or criminal case? If it's a criminal case, good luck. The court is really harsh on appellants with extensions, but bends over backward to accommodate the state. It might be a more equal playing field in civil cases.
Civil case.
I have a writ question, do you have to request filing a reply brief, or are you automatically allowed to file one?
Permission
Yes, you must request permission to file a reply to the Answer. When you make the request, I would suggest a filing date.
What do mean a filing date, when it needs to be filed by? Thank you for being nice.
There is no automatic right to file a reply for a writ.
Remember there is not even an automatic right to oppose a writ petition – the Court has to order a response/opposition be filed.
By "filing date" I mean suggest that you will be able to file by a certain date or within ___days of the order granting permission. Put some detail into your request to explain why a reply is necessary. My requests have usually been granted.
Thank you!
Normally, however, the order directing answer will note if the Court wants to see a reply, and give a timeline for it. If the order doesn't say that, it's probably intentional, though it never hurts to ask…
Shirley Parraguirre thought she was God when she was a JEA for a District Court Judge.
To be kind, she had a killer wardrobe.
Lepo skin, kinky.
QVVC carries the thigh master calendar filing.
Lynn Goya, County Clerk being arrested for DUI. In fairness to her, she was arrested and charged with DUI but plead guilty to a reckless. There must have been something wrong with her case or some juice got her a reckless which is a non DUI offense. If you do DUIs, it hard to get a reckless and you have to work it. Even John Watkins would accept a reckless on a DUI. It is a victory for the accused. I believe Lynn Goya has run for office multiple times and finally got elected. She is very involved with the Dems in Boulder and the Women's Dem groups. Don't know if this will be enough to knock her out. The RJ reported the one drink issue. If you do DUIs clients claim one or two drinks all the time(particularly beer). This is a common defense.
If she pals around with the people named above, forget it. Keep your one handed, drunk driving self to the Red Rock Dems driver's ed club.