- Quickdraw McLaw
- 33 Comments
- 456 Views
The Nevada Independent has an article up about the Nevada Supreme Court case load which is distinctly from Judge Hardesty’s perspective. Take a look at it and tell us what you think. Is he wrong? Is he right? Is this really going to be an all hands on deck scenario?
You had me at "plans to retire at the end of his term in 2022".
I rarely say this: Hardesty is right that the next 2 years are going to be the equivalent of drinking from a fire hose for trial courts and trial counsel. The next 48 months are going to be the equivalent for the Nevada Supreme Court (which means only a problem for Hardesty for the next 10 months).
Where Hardesty is hiding a glaring problem is that sure the Court whittled down its backlog BUT fails to disclose: (a) what percentage of those decisions have been SFR-related decisions that have been largely cookie cutter in their dispositions (even as they have waffled year to year). (b) With increased speed has come incredibly sloppy decisions. I practice appellate law and track every NSC/CoA Decision on civil cases. They are incredibly sloppy in not even ruling on the actual issues and record before the Court. My number of Petitions for Rehearing and En Banc Reconsideration are up markedly where we are going back to the Court and saying that the Court disposed of the case on wrong findings. We prayed for speed and should have been careful what we wished for.
What I have noticed compared to 15-20 years ago is what appears to me to be a big increase in writ petitions in civil cases. In my experience, these used to be relatively rare. Now, it seems as if they are being filed every time someone doesn't get their way on an evidentiary ruling or a motion for summary judgment. Of course 95% of them go nowhere, which is as it should be, but this has to contribute greatly to the workload. This observation is strictly anecdotal and I have not idea what the stats actually show.
*no
Those billable hours aren't going to bill themselves!
I recently received a decision by a single Justice that was so bad I am confident it was written entirely by a law clerk and never reviewed by a Justice. There is no possible way a Justice reviewed it. It wasn't just poorly reasoned, it misunderstood some very, very basic law that is mind blowing. I wish I could share it without outing myself. This is scary stuff.
Here is my horror story. Decision is entered affirming the District Court ruling but butchering the District Court judgment because it is not what the District Court decided. 3 justice panel on a 3-0 decision; clearly written by one justice (mentioned above). Rehearing sought; denied 3-0 with a 2 word decision. En banc denied 6-1 with the one dissenter being the justice who presumptively wrote the original wrong decision.
We think the quality of legal minds at the NSC is better than the District Court. Togliatti is certainly a better legal mind than Parraguirre, Hardesty or Silver. Gonzalez was certainly brighter than Parraguirre, Silver, Herndon or Hardesty and more legally assertive than Cadish (on par with Stiglich and Pickering). The difference between the bench briefs being written at the District Court level and at the NSC level are maybe 20 class rank points but both are being written by first and second year lawyers.
Nevada Supreme Court is a joke. They make the RJC look good.
10:54, same here on a federal court appeal. I honestly don't think 9th Circuit reads their opinions. Atrocious
12:18–I feel your pain, as well as that of 10:15 and the other posters, but I do have a question.
You say:"…but butchering the District Court Judgement because it is not what the District Court decided."
Could a problem be, as it often is, that the isolated Order being appealed from did not include all the relevant judicial findings?
Our appellate courts will not go beyond the four corners of the document(order) being appealed, and have become even more stringent about that in recent years.
So, often the order being appealed from does not include many of the specific findings of prior or subsequent orders, and often does not include material or findings included in the court minutes, transcript, and/or court video.
So, for example, I have seen remands where the lower court is directed to address A, B & C, and I am flabbergasted as the lower court dealt with A, B & C in excruciating detail–but then it is discovered that such findings were included in other orders but not the isolated Order being appealed from, and/or were included in court minutes or video record but never were included in the Order being appealed from.
The appellate courts insist on transmittal of the entire record, but as a practical matter the entire record is never really being reviewed or considered. Court minutes don't count. Transcripts don't count. Video does not count. In fact, material pieced together from multiple orders does not count.
Unless it is a Writ situation, one final order is being appealed from, and they will not go beyond those four corners, so that final order better incorporate all prior findings included in prior orders and/or court minutes and video.
The appellate courts and their staff will seldom do a deeper dive and study the minutes, video, transcript,or prior orders.
2:24, basically true unless the incompleteness or inaccuracy of such final order is in fact the issue(which it sometimes is), in which case the appellate courts must go beyond the four corners of such document.
@2:24
You are basically saying the trial court issued an order without supporting findings. When was the last time you saw a judge making notes? I think the truth is that many judges are presented by the JEA with a stack of orders, and sign without much thought, although there are some diligent judges. I too was a law clerk, and I more or less concur with 10:54's experience (although I know that I was brilliant in the decisions that I wrote when I clerked).
I clerked in District Court and I guarantee that I wrote many, many orders (some as long as about 40 pages) where not one word was changed. Many were in my first 3 months out of law school. Now I like to think it was my brilliant, once-in-a-generation legal mind, but in retrospect; wow was my Judge lazy and I now believe simply didn't care if I got it right. I too, wish I could give details without outing myself. What does that mean? I have no idea. How can you use that info? I have no idea. How can I use that to be a better lawyer? I have no idea.
I'll tell you how you can use it to be a better lawyer. Write your briefs to the law clerk. That's your target audience. Spoon feed to the law clerk why you're right. They're the one writing the bench memo and they're the one in the judge's ear before the final decision is made.
Yes, the good judges do an independent read to make sure their law clerk is right, but I wouldn't depend on it.
10:15 AM here.
There are lessons in this ugly truth.
(1) Make sure you are making political donations and playing the political game of being on substantively pointless committees and things.
(2) Make sure your writing is clear and your arguments are simple. This is more of a paint-by-numbers crowd than a Rembrandt fan club.
(3) Judges are lazy. Make things easy for them. Argue for relief that favors your client and takes work of the judges plate. Always take the laboring oar for proposed orders etc.
So yes, there are many things you can do with this ugly truth to be a better lawyer. At least a more effective lawyer.
12:38 and 1:35 have some good suggestions and observations.
And keep in mind what 2:24 said, particularly if you are the one preparing the final order. Have that final order reiterate everything of importance from prior orders that remained unchanged when the final order was issued. Plus, assume everything must be included in such final order, and don't have any confidence that it is okay to let "minor" or "moderate" matters be handled via minute entry or video record. Include all those in the final written order as well.
We need to train ourselves that the final order is the Holy Grail, There is no other document or other part of the record that matters, as the NSC and COA will not go beyond that final order.
So, what do we include in it? Every damn thing the judge ever ruled on at prior hearings, or in minutes, transcripts or video record.
Wow. OP 10:54 here. I was kind of being rhetorical in asking my questions, but those really are good ideas. Wow, it is so good to see some substantive help here instead of political squabbling – sincerely thank you.
It would be really helpful if the appellate judges just did appellate work and stopped sticking their collective nose into every legal committee. Stay in your lane! Get shit done.
If a writ is a form writ from COA, which is the graveyard of writs, pull the briefs. It is eye opening what the Nevada Court of Appeals ignores.
Harry Reid died.
And?
Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps,medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes. Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally."
Harry Reid Aug 5, 1993
My condolences to the family.
The 1993 quotation is the Harry Reid for whom I had voted. After he became senate majority leader, I felt his interest was more with the Washington elites than Nevadans. Although I strongly disagree with the politician he became, I have to recognize his great achievement – from a mining camp beginning to the Senate. RIP.
McCarran never should have been renamed after Harry Reid.
6:36 PM should have never been admitted to the bar.
I agree it should not have been named after Harry Reid. It should be named Las Vegas Airport. Take a nap, 805.
Unincorporated Clark County International Airport.
Naming airports and buildings after politicians is a mess. Las Vegas Int'l Airport would have done just fine.
I am a dyed in the wool Republican. Clerked in the Heritage Foundation. But we cannot have it both ways Conservatives. We want Reagan International in DC. We want Bush International in Houston. If SLC decided that they wanted to name the airport there after Orrin Hatch, I would feel the same way. Then we have to recognize the history recognizes the historical. In the State of Nevada, Harry Reid was and is historical. You can argue historical for the better or the worse, but you cannot argue that Reid was historical.
I for one do not want to whitewash history. The building was already named for a historical figure and one who did not have as much of an impact on Nevada and US history as Reid.
I politically disagreed with Reid on lots but recognize his family's loss and believe that the time to debate whether Reid was good for the state or good for the nation is not today.
Thank you, Harry Reid, for our conservative SCOTUS. We couldn't have done it without you.
Can anyone please provide the cite for the Sigal Chattah anti-mask Judge Jennifer Dorsey criticism opinion that came out? Thank you.
The Independent has it in a story: https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/lawsuit-challenging-clark-county-school-district-mask-mandate-dismissed
Thank you, it should be a great Judge Jennifer Dorsey read.