- law dawg
- 33 Comments
- 2309 Views
- ACLU suing Elko County over compliance with jail voting law. [TNI; RJ]
- Opinion: far more is needed than merely reclassifying marijuana. [TNI]
- Here’s another story on the late fertility doctor who was sued for using his own sperm to impregnate patient without consent. [KTNV]
- Here’s sort of a follow up on a 2021 lawsuit by a couple that appeared on Property Brothers–jury trial is scheduled for October. [8NewsNow]
- Las Vegas man with violent past sentenced on ghost gun charge. [8NewsNow]
- Woman must finish serving sentence after Judge Erika Ballou vacated it. [8NewsNow]
There was quite a bit of discussion regarding the Plautz case when it was first filed a couple of months back. Most who handle probate (I don’t) were of the opinion that attempting to reopen the estate at this point would be futile. Does the 2023 statute referenced in the article provide the Plaintiff’s any ammunition in this regard? But even if it does, how is this not an exercise in futility? Assuming the estate had significant assets to distribute (maybe, maybe not) and everything wasn’t just held in joint tenancy or in a POD account how on earth would you claw anything back a decade later? I see that there are some corporate defendants named in the tort case, but good luck with that unless you can produce some evidence at this late date that any of them had reason to know what was going on? And where is the insurance coverage going to come from? Nowhere is my guess. Per Odyssey there is a hearing regarding the probate petition set for about a month from now. Will be very interested to see the outcome of that. What this psychopath did to these families is horrendous, but I am not seeing a viable remedy here.
Who represents the plaintiffs in the tort case?
Christian Morris.
You can clawback POD transfers into an estate, but not 10 years later.
Just looked up the case on Odyssey (P-16-087171-E). The petition to reopen was filed 3/21, the notice of hearing was filed 4/24 and the hearing is 6/16. This is gonna be an ugly, painful hearing to watch. There was a P.I. attorney who got lit up a few weeks ago for not getting a settlement properly approved. This will be much worse than that IMO.
Erika Ballou does not belong on the bench. Legal and academic qualifications aside, she possess insufficient decision-making skills, neutrality, and decorum. Convince me otherwise.
Counterpoint, “great tits”
I’m going with 11:06
Well argued sir
Important; but not a relevant qualification for judicial office in most jurisdictions. In fact, the correlation may be inverse.
fake news
Self proclaimed “great tits”.
Meh. . . .
rack and roll baby!
Politics aside, pretty bizarre for a lower court judge to just flout the orders of a higher court.
Its absolutely nuts. How is she not disciplined for this?
She should have been removed from the bench. No justification for what she did. Her judicial activism needs to stop!
I defended her after the hot tub incident, but no longer. She acts like an unruly teenager (while on the bench), not a jurist. The hot tub thing, but itself, was a nothing burger. But she is proving she doesn’t belong on the bench.
Ask all of us who showed up for hearings this morning only to be admonished that our hearings had been taken off by her by Minute Orders that none of us had seen.
She makes Halverson look judicial.
I have had multiple occasions when I showed up for a hearing and she did did not even know what the issue before her was. “We are here for a status check…” “No your honor, this is a motion for summary judgment…” Multiple times.
on the late fertility doctor
Dad?
So the blog censors some content but is more than willing to allow sexist comments about women to remain?
Listen sugar tits / it’s a man’s world!
“Robson is surrounded by great tits” – Judge Judge Erika Ballou.
https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/las-vegas-judge-posed-in-hot-tub-with-public-defenders-faces-ethics-charges/
What’s sexist about that?
I’m the person who made the “counterpoint, great tits” post.
It was very much tongue in cheek because the OP was correct – she shouldn’t be on the bench. And as a sarcastic counterpoint, I quoted the judge’s own words.
Apologies if it came across as sexist or mysoginistic, wasn’t my intent at all. We have great women jurists here, Judge Ballou just isn’t one of them (imo)
No need to apologize. Just because someone’s myopic approach automatically assumed mysogeny was intended, when it (pretty clearly) was not.
I on the other hand posted sugar tits – take it as you will.
I said “self proclaimed great tits, Meh.”
Likewise, take it as you will.
I’m so sick of judges not paying attention to detail and making unwarranted statements that create massive headaches for the party adversely affected by the statement. As Ralphie would say fuuuu . . .
Family court update: dept A not unhappy w unaliving family court deposition fiasco because it detracts from dept’s attempt to give child custody to a convicted sex offender.
Huh?
This was clearly intended to be clever that got lost in a hot mess of syntax.
Yes. A swing and a miss.