Are You Elite?

  • Law

  • Here’s Nevada’s Legal Elite 2014 edition. Yes, we know it’s a marketing ploy. No, lawyers with 2 years experience are not really elite at this point. Yes, we’re not on it either. No, we don’t care.
  • Judicial candidate Jacob Hafter is in the news (no such thing as bad publicity?) after posting on his Facebook page that Judge Vega won’t allow a trial to go dark for two days for a Jewish holiday and implying that she is racist and anti-Semite. [RJ]
59 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 3:22 pm

Hafter is a clown.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 3:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That's disrespectful to clowns.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 3:37 pm

So, apparently, this is a Jewish holiday that was invented in the last 9 months? The trial was set 9 months ago. He didn't know? This is such a transparent shit-headed ploy for a continuance.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 4:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Really?!! This post should be removed. It contributes nothing to the discussion.

Shavuot is a valid holiday that's been around for thousands of years.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 4:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I think, if you read just a little bit deeper, you'll see that 8:37 was suggesting that Shavuot has been around for a long time and it is surprising that Mr. Hafter didn't mention 9 months ago when the trial was set.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 4:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

@ 9:36, you missed the sarcasm of @8:37 and the point the commenter was attempting to make. As I read the comment, @8:37 was not commenting on Shavuot as a religious holiday, but rather was pointing out that Hafter was has been aware for over 9 months that the scheduled trial would be taking place during Shavuot. He waited until 2 weeks before trial to seek a continuance. If he is as observant as he claims to be, he would have made sure months ago that his calendar was free during the religious holiday.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 4:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Your reading comprehension is below average.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 5:03 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Well, apparently, Hafter has been trying since March to get them to grant the continuance, but they refused, for no valid reason. So, it's not like he started bringing this up just last week.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 5:34 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Based on the article his most recent request seems to be that the trial not be held on those two days. That seems like a completely reasonable request that any judge or opposing counsel should not have a problem with. Trials are temporarily suspended all the time due to things like graduations, funerals, religious holidays, or other obligations that the judge may have. Why should it be such an issue in this case? I'm sure that Judge Vega could use the time to catch up on a few soccer games.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 5:37 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It is such an issue because the guy is an asshole. Assholes sometimes reap what they sow.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 5:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The case, if anyone is interested, is Davis v. Reddy, A646202. Hafter was present at the status check in August when the trial date was set, and AGAIN at the Med-mal status check in February when everyone agreed the trial date was fine. But, as he admitted, his "administrative filing and recordkeeping is less than adequate." Guy can't handle his own practice, and he wants to be a judge?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 5:42 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hafter is a tool. He will say anything, to anyone, at any time if he thinks that it will serve his purpose. The best part is that he's turned to Facebook to try and manufacture a mistrial — what a clown!

And yeah, @ 9:36, you need to relax. I recommend that you read things twice and then think about not only what was written but the meaning behind what was written before you take to your keyboard. No one was dismissing Shavuot — just the fool who raised it as the basis for a continuance on the eve of trial and then, when his motion was denied, lashed out at the judge for doing her job.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 6:01 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

@10:42 I think you're the fool. Had you read some of the case history, you'd know that Hafter brought this up in March, not just "the eve of trial". That apparently the Judge denied the continuance back in March, then when 2 defendants settled a week or 2 ago, he raised the motion again, now that they won't need as much time to try the case, and she still denied the motion.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 6:34 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

10:42 here. I'm familiar with the case history. The case was filed in August of 2011. The trial was set in August of 2013. Hafter files his first motion to continue (claiming Shavuot as the basis) in March of 2014. The motion is denied. Then, two weeks before the trial (i.e., on the "eve of trial"), Hafter files another motion seeking to continue the trial — again claiming Shavuot as the basis. The motion is again denied. Hafter doesn't get his way so he takes to social media, claiming the judge is a racist and an anti-Semite. All Hafter proves is that he is a joke as an attorney and a disgrace as a person.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 6:40 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

11:34, he did raise Shavuot as a basis in the 2nd motion, but only after Target settled, thus there would be less time needed for trial and no real reason his motion shouldn't have been granted.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 6:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I don't care what happened in the case. Hafter is still an asshat, period!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 6:59 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That's funny! Asshat! I am going to borrow that.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 7:17 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Borrow away my friend, borrow away.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 10:14 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Borrowed from WWL 11:44?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 12:05 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Vega has done this before soon after she was elected. In Court, she set a trial from the bench to take place on Yom Kippur above the attorney's objection. She refused to take any of the other cases on the stack. The attorney worked the holiday but he should not have had to. I dislike Hafter immensely and would not pursue this the way he has but Vega either is an anti-Semite or really could not care less about anyone's religious observance but her own.

We should also recall that Vegas is the Judge that was publicly reprimanded for recessing a murder trial 6 times so she could watch her daughter's soccer games. I guess soccer >religious observance. Vega is one judge who should have never been elected let alone reelected.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 12:46 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Hafter, please stop posting. And don't bother protest that it's not you. Please, just stop.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 4:34 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Hey 5:46 p.m. How could 5:05 p.m. be Hafter when at that exact time, he was finishing up picking jurors and giving an opening statement in the trial that Vega is judging. I'm pretty sure he wasn't standing in front of the jury typing away on his cell phone.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 4:47 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Yeah, 5:46, I'm female and not Hafter. What I posted was a fact as it happened in my firm. I couldn't care less if you believe me. For all I know, you're Vega's husband, if we're making up crap.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 6:41 am
Reply to  Anonymous

9:47 you should check your facts before you decide to participate in the blog. Judge Vega was criticized in the papers for taking time off during the trial–she consented to a public reprimand for asking a jury to deliberate all night in a murder trial (resulting in a not-guilty verdict after the first trial had a hung jury). Your criticism that Judge Vega must have concluded "soccer > religious observance," is just silly and reflects your ignorance of the law. A judge may not tacitly endorse any religion in the course of their duties. It was not improper to deny Hafter's belated request to halt trial due to a religious holiday he observes. EDCR 7.30 requires a showing of good cause before a trial date will be continued. A last minute request to allow observation of a religious holiday cannot constitute good cause under the First Amendment.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 10:55 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

11:41, I can assure you I know the facts and the law well. You don't have a clue who I am or what I know. Religious accommodation is absolutely permitted under the First Amendment and does not equate to endorsing religion. Perhaps you need a refresher course on the First Amendment and its scope but I certainly would not call you silly and ignorant. What is laughable is that I never defended Hafter. I focused on Vega and what I know about her past conduct. Your defense of Vega and her behavior in the murder trial, however, is absurd. She took a plea not only to holding the jury all night but recessing court early 6 times to attend her kid's soccer games all during the same murder trial. Facts are facts. Opinions are not facts.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 3:41 pm

Read the transcript of Hafter's judgment debtor examination attached to the election complaint filed by Judge Johnson to get a flavor of Hafter's attitude. Not only does he believe he is the smartest person in the room, everyone else is an idiot and any judge that rules against was paid off and/or an idiot. Now he throws racism into the mix as an excuse.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2cb_IKo93KQdkJZa0VTWDZKSEU/edit

In my opinion, his attitude and demeanor alone make him unfit for judicial office. The actions he has taken to avoid known creditors raise more serious questions about his fitness to be a judge.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 4:05 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

"Everybody is stupid but me." -H. Simpson

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 5:54 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This is not the first time Hafter has accused a Judge of being anti-semitic simply because they did not rule in his favor. He has made similarly baseless allegations against more than one federal judge.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 9:58 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

10:54 is right. In one federal case, Hafter' reply in support of his motion to recuse contained an allegation that the District Court Judge was anti-semitic, racist, and biased in favor of Mormons. The benchslap from the Court was special.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 10:25 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Case number? I would love to read that opinion.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 10:40 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Chudacoff, MD v. University Medical Center Of Southern Nevada et al, 2:09-cv-01679-RCJ-GWF

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 10:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

No. 2:08-cv-00863-RCJ-GWF. The order from Sept. 16, 2013 is the one I'm referring to, but there is also one from the magistrate judge in February 2013 where Hafter is reprimanded for unprofessional conduct.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 10:48 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Whoops, my mistake. That's Chudacoff II. The benchslap was in Chudacoff I, 2:08-cv-00863. The money quote: "Finally, counsel is forewarned that some of the language in the motion is contemptuous. Counsel has a right to make his legal arguments here and on appeal, but counsel risks sanctions if he cannot control his emotions like an adult and conduct himself in a professional manner. The Court expects better of its officers." Zing!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 6, 2014 1:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I have seen Jacob Hafter argue on more than a few occasions. Judge Jones nails it. In my opinion, Hafter is quite smart and extremely zealous. However, he tends to lose control of his emotions and when losing oral argument, he will say things that most lawyers know should not be said.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 3:43 pm

Looks like just about every attorney at Marquis Aurbach made the Legal Elite list. I'd hate to be an attorney at that firm and NOT make the list…

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 7:11 pm

Just so I understand, Hafter is the same person who gave away tickets to 'Book of Mormon' as a fundraiser for his campaign, a play which openly mocks another religion. However, when a judge does something that he believes to show disrespect to his religion, SHE is the racist.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 7:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Good point. I hadn't thought of that. I think Hafter only does what suits him and to hell with everyone else.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 8:03 pm

I've never had any dealings with Jacob Hafter and he looks so cuddly and harmless with his fuzzy beard and bow-tie. I guess you can't judge a judge by its cover.

– boo-yeah, Legal Elite y'all!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 9:47 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Think Matthew 7:15.

Sue
Guest
Sue
June 3, 2014 11:06 pm

I too have known Judge Vega for years and I would say that Hafter is kinda right on the money on this one. Just saying.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 11:09 pm

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/brevard-judge-accused-punching-public-defender/ngCGC/

Brevard judge tells attorney, 'I'll beat your ass,' allegedly throws punches…

(…sad but apparently true…)

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 5:34 am
Reply to  Anonymous

There are several judges I wish would try this with me. I would cunt punt them into the next election cycle!!!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 3:07 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

your phrasing is offensive.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 4:48 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Disgusting. Nice to think you can refer to women in that manner.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 5:18 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This is a thing on the internet. I doubt the writer meant it in the offensive way you two are taking it. If you have some free time, do a search for the phrase and see if you can find the original letter. It's a thing to behold.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 11:14 pm

YOU HAFTA SIDE WITH HAFTER,

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 3, 2014 11:42 pm

Damien Sheets???? Seriously??? "I Like" Liker would be more likely to be on this list …

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 12:54 am

Another benefit of going in-house is that there's no pressure to appear on these ridiculous BS lists.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 2:00 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Amen.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 4:54 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I am a successful attorney who is not on the list, and who could give a shit about a list.

A Falconi
Guest
A Falconi
June 4, 2014 3:11 am

Nice article, posted to Hafter and Vega on http://www.ournevadajudges.com

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 3:49 pm
Reply to  A Falconi

What is up with that website? It looks like a 9 year old developed it in 1993, in the dark ages of the internet. It does not even work.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 6:33 pm

As usual, the Legal Elite is an embarrassment to that magazine. About 10% of the listed attorneys are extremely elite and would make any list. I have never even heard of just about all of the other 90%. I am on every real list and would NEVER stoop to throwing my name in the hat for this garbage list and portray myself as someone who has to stuff ballot boxes asking all of my friends to vote for me. How humiliating. I suppose it's good for the attorneys who can never make a real list since they have something to add to their resume.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 9:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

If by "every real list" you are including the list I've d-bag aholes I'm sure you are on every real list.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 9:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

of

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 4, 2014 11:31 pm

2:43…. people on "every real list" aren't spending their lunch break posting mean spirited comments on legal blogs. =)

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 12:39 am

I agree with 2:43. It's not a prestigious list. I'm surprised that they still publish it each year given the negative comments about it. I guess they make enough advertising money that it doesn't matter.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 5, 2014 4:05 am

I agree too. The Legal Elite has been a joke every year. It's good that people are speaking up about it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 6, 2014 12:13 am

I made the Legal Elite this year. We all know it isn't accurate, but so what? My clients see it listed on my website and then hire me. It's no different than spinning around in a TV commercial and making people believe that you're a good attorney.