Yet another woman killed by an intimate partner. I wonder if the number of deaths correlates to the abysmal TRO grant rates in this town. I guess we’ll never know…
These domestic murder suicide stories have always revealed, IMO, that the perpetrator (almost always male, I’m male) thought of the female as his possession. Murder is the final act of control. I always wonder how the man came to think this way. I suspect it wasn’t a recent development, but that the murder suicide is the acute revelation. Did his father model poor behavior towards women? Was his father absent? What kind of friends did he have? What kind of other relationships did he have thorughout his life?
I agree. At its core, intimate partner violence is about control. Many men respond with emotional or physical violence when women fail to comply with male expectations or challenge men’s perceived authority to regulate women’s behavior (whether that has to do with sexual jealousy or any other thing that men feel entitled to control). This sense of entitlement to monitor, correct, and discipline women manifests in a wide range of coercive practices, including hostility, degradation, and threats. When women deviate from their prescribed “place,” such control escalates into physical violence. In its most extreme form, this violence results in femicide. As Lundy Bancroft argues, these acts are best understood not as crimes of passion, but as outcomes of entrenched power, entitlement, and coercive control: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywsTdzkiPF0
I’m thinking about the Las Vegas/Arizona attorney, Marla Hudgens, who was killed by her husband along with their small children. If there are any women reading this blog and are experiencing domestic violence, know you are not alone. I’ve helped women attorneys in Las Vegas in this situation. And attorney Amanda Lee talks about attorneys experiencing domestic violence here: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/domestic_violence/Initiatives/five-for-five/domestic-violence-legal-profession/
Her murder and that of her beloved children were heart-breaking. I worked with her at the NV SCT when she was a law clerk and she was a true joy to work with and be around.
I support granting of substantiated TPOs (TROs are something different). But if you think a piece of paper is going to stop a person so exorcised with their ex to be ready to murder them, well I will just disagree.
Do you need empirical evidence that a single sheet of paper cannot and will not stop a bullet, knife or other weapon? TPOs are paper that are only as good as the LEO and then Court willing to act and enforce a TPO. The cases in which a victim has/had a TPO are illustrative of that relatively indisputable fact. As someone integrally involved in the Family Court system, too often people rely upon a TPO as a panacea for halting felonious violence.
But I will await your scientific and studies that you believe show a partner with homicidal intent is deterred by the chance of drawing a contempt of court finding for violating a TPO.
Often a TPO comes down to “he said/she said” and too often family court judges don’t grant them largely due to bias.
Guest
Anonymous
December 29, 2025 12:13 pm
NV Supreme Court issued seven opinions last week including one that permits third-party beneficiaries to maintain legal malpractice claims and one about the NY Times seeking to unseal the Murdoch trust case.
It depends on whether they want briefing on it and they intend to take it up. In my experience, if they are going to reject it you’ll usually know in 5-8 weeks. If they are going to take the matter up it takes longer, maybe a few months.
The El Cortez case is interesting because while procedural rules have meaning, pretty much appears that El Cortez Reno got hometowned which is happening far too often with Washoe cases lately. ECR’s attorneys were in Las Vegas; Noble Pie’s attorney was in Washoe. Case is in Washoe. ECR asked for a short one-week extension on what would otherwise be a dispositive motion. Granting dismissal under the circumstances appears overly harsh (and trust me that I am no fan of either Dan Polsenberg or Ogonna).
The law probably does require that result but it sucks to see the refusal to grant the courtesy of a *one-week* extension rewarded. And yes, plaintiff’s counsel should have made the request earlier, but you should still grant your opponent a one-week extension unless time is of the essence.
Is it an important film? Written by an old man, it purports to unironically detail the desire of a teenage girl, her lust for older men, and her cruel ability to manipulate them through the promise of sex. He hits her. She responds with love. So if you mean an important film for understanding how men project their fantasies onto girls, sure. Otherwise the whole premise is mostly fantasy.
You confusing cinematic quality when the previous poster was discussing cinematic importance. The movie caused maelstroms of controversy for its time regarding its depictions and triggered a wave of French films that came to America as revolutionary films as opposed to effete art house fodder. Yes it is an important film in the history of cinema.
It is a film that was intended to 1) titillate in order to sell movie tickets and 2) to promote the director’s wife’s career. Nothing more. There was no intellectual premise or introspection, only sensationalism.
Guest
Anonymous
December 30, 2025 6:55 am
Watching boomers like Eglet desperately trying to stay relevant is just sad.
Well if he can’t win before members of the community, why not try a panel of people he’s donated to?
Guest
Anonymous
December 30, 2025 8:43 am
If you filed an answer, have you waived the ability to file a Motion to Dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction in state court? I received a case from prior counsel involving an incident that occurred in a small town that is not in Clark County, yet the lawsuit was filed in Clark County. An answer was filed by prior counsel about a month ago.
Personal jurisdiction or SMJ? And filed in the wrong town sounds like a venue rather than jurisdictional issue at the District Court level (different answer at the Justice Court level).
NRS 13.050  Cases in which venue may be changed.
1.  If the county designated for that purpose in the complaint, petition or motion is not the proper county, the proceeding may, notwithstanding, be tried or heard therein, unless:
(a) After the filing of a complaint or petition, the defendant demands in writing, before the time for answering expires, that the trial be had in the proper county, and the place of trial be thereupon changed by consent of the parties, or by order of the court, as provided in this section.
(b) In a proceeding in which the court has continuing jurisdiction after the issuance of a final order, judgment or decree, including, without limitation, any proceeding for divorce, annulment, separate maintenance or parentage or custody of a child and where no party currently resides in the county in which the order, judgment or decree was entered, the respondent demands in writing, before the time for filing a response expires, that the petition or motion be heard in the county of residence of either party to the proceeding or in the county where the child who is the subject of the proceeding resides, or by order of the court, as provided in this section.
2.  The court may, on motion or stipulation, change the place of the proceeding in the following cases:
(a) When the county designated in the complaint, petition or motion is not the proper county.
(b) When there is reason to believe that an impartial proceeding cannot be had therein.
(c) When the convenience of the witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by the change.
(d) When any defendant in a case commenced in a county without a business court requests a change to a county:
(1) With a business court; and
(2) In which the case, if originally commenced in such county, would be eligible for assignment to the business court.
(e) When each of the parties consent to the change.
3.  When the place of the proceeding is changed, all other matters relating to the proceeding shall be had in the county to which the place of the proceeding is changed, unless otherwise provided by the consent of the parties in writing duly filed, or by order of the court, and the papers shall be filed or transferred accordingly.
4.  As used in this section, “business court” means, as designated pursuant to the rules of the applicable district court:
I think NRS 13.050(1)(a) is going to be the operative statute, if in state district court, which provides even if venue is not proper, the proceeding may be held in the improper county unless the defendant demands in writing that the trial be held in the proper county. A motion is not a substitute for a demand. See New Transit Co. v. Harris Bros. Lumber Co., 80 Nev. 465, 468-69, 398 P.2d 133, 134 (1964) (explaining that a motion for a change of venue does not meet the requirement that a written demand for a change of venue be filed).
If there wasn’t a timely written demand for a change of venue, the issue is waived, unless the parties will stipulate to a change of venue.
Contrast this with federal court, which FRCP 12(h) makes clear improper venue is a waivable defense if not timely asserted in a motion to dismiss or responsive pleading.
Yet another woman killed by an intimate partner. I wonder if the number of deaths correlates to the abysmal TRO grant rates in this town. I guess we’ll never know…
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/family-ids-woman-shot-killed-by-boyfriend-in-north-las-vegas-3255573/
These domestic murder suicide stories have always revealed, IMO, that the perpetrator (almost always male, I’m male) thought of the female as his possession. Murder is the final act of control. I always wonder how the man came to think this way. I suspect it wasn’t a recent development, but that the murder suicide is the acute revelation. Did his father model poor behavior towards women? Was his father absent? What kind of friends did he have? What kind of other relationships did he have thorughout his life?
I agree. At its core, intimate partner violence is about control. Many men respond with emotional or physical violence when women fail to comply with male expectations or challenge men’s perceived authority to regulate women’s behavior (whether that has to do with sexual jealousy or any other thing that men feel entitled to control). This sense of entitlement to monitor, correct, and discipline women manifests in a wide range of coercive practices, including hostility, degradation, and threats. When women deviate from their prescribed “place,” such control escalates into physical violence. In its most extreme form, this violence results in femicide. As Lundy Bancroft argues, these acts are best understood not as crimes of passion, but as outcomes of entrenched power, entitlement, and coercive control: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywsTdzkiPF0
I’m thinking about the Las Vegas/Arizona attorney, Marla Hudgens, who was killed by her husband along with their small children. If there are any women reading this blog and are experiencing domestic violence, know you are not alone. I’ve helped women attorneys in Las Vegas in this situation. And attorney Amanda Lee talks about attorneys experiencing domestic violence here: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/domestic_violence/Initiatives/five-for-five/domestic-violence-legal-profession/
Make a plan. Get out if you can.
She was a Boyd grad. Boyd didn’t say/do a thing in remembrance.
And I think she donated time/money to Boyd. So that’s really awful.
Her murder and that of her beloved children were heart-breaking. I worked with her at the NV SCT when she was a law clerk and she was a true joy to work with and be around.
I support granting of substantiated TPOs (TROs are something different). But if you think a piece of paper is going to stop a person so exorcised with their ex to be ready to murder them, well I will just disagree.
Do you have any empirical evidence for this claim? Or do you regularly comment on issues you don’t fully understand just for funsies?
Do you need empirical evidence that a single sheet of paper cannot and will not stop a bullet, knife or other weapon? TPOs are paper that are only as good as the LEO and then Court willing to act and enforce a TPO. The cases in which a victim has/had a TPO are illustrative of that relatively indisputable fact. As someone integrally involved in the Family Court system, too often people rely upon a TPO as a panacea for halting felonious violence.
But I will await your scientific and studies that you believe show a partner with homicidal intent is deterred by the chance of drawing a contempt of court finding for violating a TPO.
I was waiting for a troll to pop up. You did not disappoint!
Often a TPO comes down to “he said/she said” and too often family court judges don’t grant them largely due to bias.
NV Supreme Court issued seven opinions last week including one that permits third-party beneficiaries to maintain legal malpractice claims and one about the NY Times seeking to unseal the Murdoch trust case.
how long do they take to decide whether to entertain a writ petition (generally speaking)?
It depends on whether they want briefing on it and they intend to take it up. In my experience, if they are going to reject it you’ll usually know in 5-8 weeks. If they are going to take the matter up it takes longer, maybe a few months.
do you have a link to the legal malpractice case or the case number?
https://nvcourts.gov/supreme. Bernstein v. Morris
Not a fan of Charleston v. Hardesty (yes, THAT Hardesty) being narrowed.
It was and is that Hardesty which made his hypocritical hangman ways on the Court all the more ironic.
Bernstein v. Morris is a CoA Opinion
The El Cortez case is interesting because while procedural rules have meaning, pretty much appears that El Cortez Reno got hometowned which is happening far too often with Washoe cases lately. ECR’s attorneys were in Las Vegas; Noble Pie’s attorney was in Washoe. Case is in Washoe. ECR asked for a short one-week extension on what would otherwise be a dispositive motion. Granting dismissal under the circumstances appears overly harsh (and trust me that I am no fan of either Dan Polsenberg or Ogonna).
The law probably does require that result but it sucks to see the refusal to grant the courtesy of a *one-week* extension rewarded. And yes, plaintiff’s counsel should have made the request earlier, but you should still grant your opponent a one-week extension unless time is of the essence.
The “rules are rules” bit was particularly obnoxious.
I hate that decision but am teeing it up right now for about 3 different motions where I plan to use it.
The district court lawyer was Dennis Prince
“And God created women”
A wonderful invention. Thank God.
The title is a reference to an important movie that starred an actress who became an unrepentant bigot for the last 30 years of her life.
Is it an important film? Written by an old man, it purports to unironically detail the desire of a teenage girl, her lust for older men, and her cruel ability to manipulate them through the promise of sex. He hits her. She responds with love. So if you mean an important film for understanding how men project their fantasies onto girls, sure. Otherwise the whole premise is mostly fantasy.
You confusing cinematic quality when the previous poster was discussing cinematic importance. The movie caused maelstroms of controversy for its time regarding its depictions and triggered a wave of French films that came to America as revolutionary films as opposed to effete art house fodder. Yes it is an important film in the history of cinema.
It is a film that was intended to 1) titillate in order to sell movie tickets and 2) to promote the director’s wife’s career. Nothing more. There was no intellectual premise or introspection, only sensationalism.
Watching boomers like Eglet desperately trying to stay relevant is just sad.
Well if he can’t win before members of the community, why not try a panel of people he’s donated to?
If you filed an answer, have you waived the ability to file a Motion to Dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction in state court? I received a case from prior counsel involving an incident that occurred in a small town that is not in Clark County, yet the lawsuit was filed in Clark County. An answer was filed by prior counsel about a month ago.
Personal jurisdiction or SMJ? And filed in the wrong town sounds like a venue rather than jurisdictional issue at the District Court level (different answer at the Justice Court level).
Sorry, I meant venue. Has the ability to file an MTD based on improper venue been waived?
NRS 13.050  Cases in which venue may be changed.
1.  If the county designated for that purpose in the complaint, petition or motion is not the proper county, the proceeding may, notwithstanding, be tried or heard therein, unless:
(a) After the filing of a complaint or petition, the defendant demands in writing, before the time for answering expires, that the trial be had in the proper county, and the place of trial be thereupon changed by consent of the parties, or by order of the court, as provided in this section.
(b) In a proceeding in which the court has continuing jurisdiction after the issuance of a final order, judgment or decree, including, without limitation, any proceeding for divorce, annulment, separate maintenance or parentage or custody of a child and where no party currently resides in the county in which the order, judgment or decree was entered, the respondent demands in writing, before the time for filing a response expires, that the petition or motion be heard in the county of residence of either party to the proceeding or in the county where the child who is the subject of the proceeding resides, or by order of the court, as provided in this section.
2.  The court may, on motion or stipulation, change the place of the proceeding in the following cases:
(a) When the county designated in the complaint, petition or motion is not the proper county.
(b) When there is reason to believe that an impartial proceeding cannot be had therein.
(c) When the convenience of the witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by the change.
(d) When any defendant in a case commenced in a county without a business court requests a change to a county:
(1) With a business court; and
(2) In which the case, if originally commenced in such county, would be eligible for assignment to the business court.
(e) When each of the parties consent to the change.
3.  When the place of the proceeding is changed, all other matters relating to the proceeding shall be had in the county to which the place of the proceeding is changed, unless otherwise provided by the consent of the parties in writing duly filed, or by order of the court, and the papers shall be filed or transferred accordingly.
4.  As used in this section, “business court” means, as designated pursuant to the rules of the applicable district court:
(a) A business court docket;
(b) A business matter designation; or
(c) At least one business court judge.
I think NRS 13.050(1)(a) is going to be the operative statute, if in state district court, which provides even if venue is not proper, the proceeding may be held in the improper county unless the defendant demands in writing that the trial be held in the proper county. A motion is not a substitute for a demand. See New Transit Co. v. Harris Bros. Lumber Co., 80 Nev. 465, 468-69, 398 P.2d 133, 134 (1964) (explaining that a motion for a change of venue does not meet the requirement that a written demand for a change of venue be filed).
If there wasn’t a timely written demand for a change of venue, the issue is waived, unless the parties will stipulate to a change of venue.
Contrast this with federal court, which FRCP 12(h) makes clear improper venue is a waivable defense if not timely asserted in a motion to dismiss or responsive pleading.