- law dawg
- 43 Comments
- 2016 Views
- Leslie Mark Stovall temporarily suspended from practicing law. [News3LV; RJ]
- Influencer faces backlash after posting videos handing out liquor and machetes to unhoused. [News3LV]
- Attorney Neama Rahmani weighs in on the legality of such handouts. [News3LV via YouTube]
- Lombardo signs major criminal justice bill, long top priority, with immigration adds. [TNI]
- Housing instability can be deeply connected with Nevada child welfare. [Nevada Current]
- Resorts World omits money laundering case from its NY casino application. [Nevada Current]
- CCSD teacher charged with sexually assaulting student makes court appearance. [RJ]
I worked at a firm with LMS on staff during one of his prior suspensions in the early aughts. He was not a fun person to work with and they had him doing everything except signing pleadings. I don’t think being suspended or even disbarred is going to deter him any more than the suspension did back then. Not surprised that he was working on the Ronaldo case with LD – my run ins with her as opposing counsel have always left me questioning reality.
Who is LD?
The news 3 article links to this article and it mentions the other attorneys on that case: https://news3lv.com/news/local/judge-slaps-335k-penalty-on-ronaldo-accusers-las-vegas-lawyer
LD is his ex-wife and it was a nasty split. Congrats to Stovall for having a toddler at his age though. Guy can still spit game.
Lovely image haha
Men over 45 should not be impregnating women. I said what I said.
Turning 60 while your kid is still a high school freshman sounds awful.
Idk, man. Maybe we should let women choose which sperm they want to impregnate them—young/old, free/purchased. Seems like the right thing to do.
Imagine women waiting until they are economically and personally ready to have children with men who are economically and personally ready to have children. I hold nothing against those of you who had kids at 25, 35 or 45 or never had kids.
Bravo!
Well, no. It’s usually a joint decision made between a male and female.
As always, the old dude on the spectrum pops in to show everyone he doesn’t know the difference between a categorical prohibition (no old men reproducing) and an individual right (the right to choose a mate). One of those things is not like the other.
Autism is associated with advanced paternal age. Not a risk I would take.
Thanks, RFK Jr.
I always liked LD, enjoyed working with her. No, I am not LD.
The blog title is what many have called my girlfriend’s vajaja.
Nice.
Why are Boyd professors constantly trolling this site?
In the case of your girlfriend, I believe it should read, ”A THREAT TO THE PUBIC.”
Back to watching Beevis and Butthead
You know her too hahaha
And people say you’re not a class act…
The State Bar’s Answering Brief is quite aggressive as to Stovall’s character. It puts him on blast, drops the mic, etc. I do wonder if it’s so over the top that it isn’t taken seriously. Not defending Stovall, just observing a posture/tone that’s turned to 11 when maybe a more subtle approach would have been more effective.
I’m skeptical the NSB has anything that goes to 11.
Go read the Answering Brief. Parts of it were quoted in the comments yesterday too.
No opinion on discipline or suspension. But the docket in discipline case is worth a read. Hooge disobeyed multiple orders and missed multiple deadlines. It makes me wonder what Hooge would do to any other attorney who did that and whether the court would just ignore it. It’s all a bit ironic.
Self righteous sanctimonious hypocrites?
Here is my impression: (no defender of Stovall here) but what a blovating gasbag of a brief from SBN This was not so substantial that it required all of those pages.
First time reading SBN’s work?
DH malignant heart, self absorbed to the core, hides behind supposed morality but it all comes from estimation of self as low. Had to listen to him speak one time.
“malignant heart” Stop it. You sound like a 7th grade drama queen.
That was my favorite Heart album. I’ve always thought Ann Wilson was underrated.
and underweighted.
The fact that “malignant heart” seems like a big word or fancy to you is what is really funny. Yes, some of us have a classical education and use “big words” freely.
It feels like someone used ChatGPT to draft it – the tone is so off.
Leads to a question, does anyone call out the other side when a brief or motion appears to have been written by AI? I mean just the wording, not necessarily made up citations. I did once, nothing came of it, but it felt right to say something.
“but it felt right to say something.” Why? Are you a conceited artisanal wordsmith? Do you look down your nose at synthetic or highly processed prose? Or worse—and you can be honest here—do you hold an ugly prejudice against em dashes?
Also, I hope this comment finds you well.
I, for one, overloaded my last MTD with em dashes as a signal that I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
I’m all for anything that improves opposing counsel’s intelligibility.
It was more of an attempt at character assassination than legal brief.
This is pretty stupid. You “called someone out” for something that “appeared to be AI.” So you’re saying you didn’t actually know. Yet you sanctimoniously “called them out.” Makes a lot of sense. Unless you’re Bryan Garner, GTFO with this nonsense.
“Unless you’re Brian Garner.” Hahahaha
He never should have been allowed to come back from his last suspension
It does seem egregious. But you know what else seems egregious? The number of people unfit to practice law that the Supreme Court of Nevada allows to continue practicing law after a brief suspension. Maybe they felt they had to advocate harder for our profession given the court’s track record.