- Quickdraw McLaw
- 15 Comments
- 183 Views
If you haven’t read it yet, go read Dayvid Figler‘s opinion piece for the Nevada Independent. Discuss. Does what he say ring true for you? Does his assessment of the state of judicial selection in Nevada hit the mark? Does speaking out about it accomplish anything? Will it ever change?
Also, the Board of Governors election results are in and the following candidates will be sworn in on Thursday, June 27, at the State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting in Vail, Colorado.
District 1: Clark County
- Richard Dreitzer
- Jeffrey Albregts
- Kari Stephens
- Catherine Mazzeo
District 2: White Pine, Elko, Eureka, Churchill, Lander, Humboldt, Lyon, Lincoln, Douglas, Mineral, Nye, Esmeralda, Pershing and Storey Counties
- Julie Cavanaugh Bill
District 3: Carson City
- Joel Locke
District 4: Washoe County (uncontested)
- Vernon “Gene” Leverty
I think he nailed it, but I don't see a lot of change anytime soon.
And BOGs are the high school govt with a hall monitor. Let the good times roll.
So much for the agents of change. These are the ridiculous Status Quo candidates.
Where is that dang Russian interference when I need it?!
Why doesn't Kim Farmer release the vote tally? I want to know how many votes each of the Student Government candidates received. Where's the transparency??
SCR 84(6) requires the vote be made public.
6. The ballots shall be counted within the 30 days prior to the ensuing annual meeting of the state bar, and validated by a neutral third party. The executive director shall certify the result to the president and shall thereafter announce the vote and declare the persons receiving the highest number of votes for the respective offices, or if an uncontested election, provide the names of nominated candidates for governors of the state bar for the ensuing year, commencing upon their taking the oath of office, following the election of officers, at the annual meeting.
That's what the rule says. Good luck getting Kim Farmer to "announce the vote" instead of announcing the results.
Yesterday there was a lengthy tread on abuses by unbundled attorneys in Family Court. There were several really good observations.
But the last one, at 4:37, which was quite lengthy, detailed some abuses that I can't believe the judges would tolerate. These include people being forced to pay for expensive business evaluation, and forensic accountings, when they don't even have a business, but simply perform some very limited handy man work in addition to their full-time job.
Is this really true that these expensive evaluations are ordered in such instances, or is it mainly just that the unbundled attorney will make these idiotic requests, but they are seldom actually ordered.
Also, does the judge have the jurisdiction, or is it a proper use of discretion, to compel people to pay expensive outside "experts" that they have no interest in retaining–whether it be for a custody evaluation, or a financial matter
I wish I had the time to write in detail, I clerked at Family Court and it was disgusting, the outright favortism and disregard of rules. There was not even a pretense of hiding it but rather it was more of "I'm so powerful, it doesn't matter what I do." Divorce lawyers, like me, have the opportunity to be the absolute worst people on the planet. It provides the process and way to be evil. It is up to the individual lawyer to choose good. But the FC Judges, and the Bar, pave the way to hell with greased lighting. One must be careful to not fall into their ways. Just one example, believe me or not I truly do not care, I personally saw and heard a Judge say (in the hallway) one time that the plaintiff was too "ugly" to have had X happen to her. I am not very politically correct but I almost felt sick to my stomach. The other lawyer laughed heartily. To my shame, I smiled nervously, and the case was done. But it reflects the atmosphere.
Figler, like all criminal defense attorneys is a rat, who puts criminals back into the community at huge cost to society.
One day, he will be sent to a gulag to atone for his crimes.
Because the cost to society by overincarcerating and not having criminals put to meaningful work and restitution is so menial. And yeah nothing slightly horrifying about discussing sending a Jewish attorney to the gulag. You must be a real hoot during the Great Purge.
10:50 does not sound at all like they are an attorney. That is the type of comment a very unsophisticated(and, candidly, quite ignorant) lay person makes who understands little or nothing about the legal process or constitutional protections.
I have never heard of a licensed attorney that basically says the criminal defense system really sucks because it consists solely of scummy lawyers putting scummy criminals back on the street so they can re-offend.
If that is the extent of 10:50's belief system on the issue, and the extent of their knowledge of the process, they must have received an "F' in Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, as well as Constitutional Law. And if so, how did 10:50 ever graduate?
Um…did anyone else notice that 10:50 was written by "Jayvid Bigler"? Sounds to me that 10:50 is being silly, or might be the man himself. Just a thought.
You live in an echo chamber then, pal
Everyone, except for Bolshevik attorneys feels that way.
Lets see how well "muh constitution" works for you when a three time offender has you at knifepoint.
Any counsel who believes in the rules of law and applying it; being FAIR and IMPARTIAL no matter who is in front of you; not make orders when you feel like it, want to run for Judge in 2020 and take over Department T?