Video is circulating of newly elected Judge Erika Ballou getting emotional during sentencing. [8NewsNow]
A lawsuit alleges government employees were exposed to toxic chemicals at the Clark County Government Center. [8NewsNow]
California attorney Keith Bishop says it is time for foreign corporations in Nevada to publish or perish (per NRS 80.190). Does anyone do this? [JD Supra]
Brave man? He did it to run one of his competitors out of business. I mean great that Nancy and Leon got caught I guess but lets not pretend that altruism was at the wheel here. Furthermore there was a lot of collateral damage to other people on the periphery of the HOA case that were ruined due to it.
Dude had a plan and executed it; gotta admire that. He essentially invented the massive construction defect litigation machine of the '90's and '00's.
Every half-assed, donut-eating, defense schmuck who had work during that era should get down on his or her knees and say a prayer of thanks for Scott Canepa. Every mediocre insurance defense firm that opened a Vegas satellite office, every court reporter, every clueless claim adjuster, every mediator, every special master, every "expert" who made a living talking about leaky stucco needs to thank Scott Canepa. Yes, he got a lot richer than you did; but you were able to stay afloat because of his idea. Thank the good Lord for Scott Canepa and NRS Chapter 40.
Shame he went so young and missed out on many years enjoying all that dough he made.
Those who haven't practiced in construction defects will probably never grasp the full impact that someone like Canepa had on the state. (And likewise Duane Shinnick). It's easy to mock, but the guy did right by a lot of people, created a lot of billing opportunities for countless others in the community, and made bank along the way. He may have been a pain as opposing counsel, but there were certainly worse people to deal with who were never quite as worthy an opponent as Scott. My condolences to his family and his partners.
No mocking Canepa. He was a force. A lot of the so-called big dogs in NTLA/NJA over the past 25-30 years cut corners and worked with shady characters. No legitimate evidence that Canepa ever did anything unethical.
Returning to the subject of Canepa, there were other impressive elements to his story and vision. For one, his early work establishing NRS Chapter 40 took the construction and commercial insurance industries almost completely by surprise. Carriers had, prior to Ch. 40, relied on exclusions in all their policies to withhold coverage for shoddy workmanship. They treated defect claims as uncovered contract claims and denied coverage. Prior to Ch. 40, aggrieved consumers would sue contractors and, at best, maybe get some defects repaired. Just as frequently, contractors would fold their companies or file bankruptcy to avoid liability. Insurance was rarely part of the equation.
Canepa was instrumental in forcing insurers to defend their negligent policyholders. Once on the hook for defense expenses, insurers began settling claims rather than incur massive defense costs. Eventually, insurers began, as a matter of course, settling cases for which they knew indemnity obligations were legally absent. Insurers paid many billions of dollars settling cases and passed the expense on in the form of higher premiums.
There are a few ways to look at this. On one hand, it can be viewed as an extortion. On the other hand, it can be viewed as friendly to homebuying consumers. Either way, insurance companies fed and clothed a lot of people who jumped into the massive stew of discovery and litigation. California insurance defense firms (and more than a few plaintiff attorneys) flocked to Las Vegas to get in on the action. Our legal community grew by leaps and bounds.
It was Canepa's vision which largely spawned a whole construction defect "industry" in Nevada and kept a lot of lawyers working and billing. Whether he did it to get rich (he did) or to help consumers can be debated. But many reading this likely directly or indirectly owe much of their legal careers to Canepa. And many condo owners got new windows and siding.
Canepa was controversial, but he took a shot. I suppose if you want to avoid controversy you can just do nothing. Canepa was not a guy who avoided controversy. And he somehow seemed to avoid the dirtier end of the game in which some became entangled.
I liked Scott personally. However saying "Canepa. . . somehow seemed to avoid the dirtier end of the game in which some became entangled" is like saying Eglet avoided the dirtier end of the Medical Mafia game. Both played in that end of their respective pools and lived to tell about it.
Eglet was publicly implicated (though never prosecuted). If Canepa ever did get his hands dirty, it never reached that level. There was never a time when it was generally known that Canepa was at risk. Eglet did have such a period; although it never came to much.
Perhaps Eglet was genuinely innocent; perhaps the feds were satisfied pinning felonies on Noel Gage, Howard Awand, Mark Kabins, and John Thalgott.
I have a judge referencing a new Order opening up civil trials at the convention center that supposedly came out yesterday but I'm not seeing anything on the website. (Also 2 courtrooms in the RJC but sounds like criminal will take precedence). Anybody have a copy? She said came out yesterday, but I'm not seeing anything.
Thank you for the link. As always, the criminal defense bar has all the fun. In my next life, I am coming back a criminal defense attorney, with a big watch and bigger attitude. (Yes, I am genuinely jealous.)
Rumor has is Forsberg does nothing but yell. Court staff hears her screaming in her courtroom/office nonstop. Gibson got taken out of domestic cases real fast and shuttled back to the dungeon so he can yell at parents with their kids caught up in the system instead of yelling at the paying clients upstairs. Butler can't handle her caseload so if she doesn't call your case first, plan on waiting. Burton is the new presiding in family court which means Duckworth is back to a full caseload so I guess we have that bright spot.
Appeared in front of D. Butler the other day and was very pleased with the manner in which she ran her courtroom. I don't believe Forsberg is yelling all the time.
Forsberg was already on the bench so not a new judge. And the idea of Forsberg yelling all of the time is preposterous. Animated? Maybe. Loud? Quite possible. Yelling and screaming? Nah.
It's a shame Siegfried and Roy both died within a year or two of each other, and I recognize they brought a lot of joy to many people, and they were true Vegas icons.
I, however, was not a fan. The show itself was old-time corn-ball Vegas showmanship of the most lame sort. It was a big nothing tied up in a showy, pleasant package.
It was always touted as a must see for all tourists as well as locals.
Admittedly, it was elaborate, costly, they had agreeable personalities, and the Tigers were the true highlight of the show.
But as far as the actual illusions, they seemed lame beyond measure despite the audience erupting in the expected ecstatic applause after each stunt.
I saw budget illusions who were far better and presented far more intriguing and baffling tricks that were far more difficult to decipher as to how it was accomplished.
But the "magic" or "illusions" of S & L were dreadful beyond measure in my humble opinion. For example,we were meant to wonder how one of them got from inside a coffin to standing upright on the opposite end of the stage with us seeing none of how it was accomplished. Well, they would darken the stage during the stunt so it was impossible to see what happened, so he could have simply climbed out of the coffin and walked across the stage during the 45 seconds the stage was pitch black. Then the lights came on and he'd triumphantly raise his arms while the audience exploded in raptured bliss.
So, as illusionists and magicians they really left much to be desired. As far as the total package as a "show", again, the animal part was kind of cool and unique.
Anyone who remembers the show share my opinion on how really dreadful and amateurish the "magic" or "illusions" were?
I saw S&R and believe 2:55 is being far too charitable.
Never wanted to go, but my wife always wanted to go and insisted I take her on her birthday one year. Them working with the animals was kind of cool and cute, but I found the actual illusions even more preposterous than 2:55 finds them.
The one I specifically remember as being so truly awful was the one 2:55 just explained. One of them gets out of the box and winds up on the other end of the stage. My goodness, how on earth did he do it!?
Well, not too hard to figure out as the stage went pitch black for the better part of a minute. So, dare I suggest that during that minute of total darkness he merely pushed open the coffin lid, climbed out, and walked across the stage?
The last two comments reminds me why I am blessed to have an almost childlike naiveté. I was bedazzled and amused watching the show at the Mirage 25+ years ago. My date and I then held hands watching the volcano for a while. It was a wonderful evening.
3:19–Because it was a romantic evening you were not looking at the show in a critical sense, nor should you have been.
I,like,3:19,also enjoyed the volcano with a date. I also am tempted to report that we enjoyed the pirate ship battle as well, but I found out subsequently that to enjoy the pirate ship battle was racist.
I never knew why till years later someone explained the display was named after Sir Francis Drake, who, among other things, was a slave trader. So, I see the point. But all this(the racist implications) could have been avoided if rather than naming it the Sir Francis Drake Pirate Ship Battle(or whatever it was precisely called), they just dropped his name and called it "Pirate Ship Battle."
But because Drake's name was attached to it, the pirate ship battle was dropped. Never to be seen again.
These exhibits were during a time in the 90's when they were attempting to make Vegas a little more family friendly by having things the children could enjoy as well. That project and philosophy did not last long, but I did not find the concept to be the total failure some found it to be. For one, I enjoyed that Star Trek Experience as well, or whatever it was called.
"But because Drake's name was attached to it, the pirate ship battle was dropped. Never to be seen again." That is not true. The show was dropped in a rebranding of the hotel which tried to go younger and sexier with the Sirens of TI show. The Pirate Battle featured a battle between pirates aboard the Hispaniola and British sailors aboard HMS Britannia. It is true that Steve Wynn had the name of the British ship changed from He even changed the name of the British ship from HMS Sir Francis Drake to HMS Brittania after members of the black community suggested that Drake was a slave trader; however that occurred in 1993 before the show ever debuted.
Guest
Anonymous
January 14, 2021 9:53 pm
The Government Center toxic tort complaint is subject to an immediate motion to dismiss.
Ain't that the truth, brother. Got to make their billing.
Guest
Anonymous
January 14, 2021 10:29 pm
Yes but this motion to dismiss will have merit.
Guest
Anonymous
January 14, 2021 10:59 pm
She's crying over a 24-60 month plea deal after the defendant robbed someone? I was expecting a much more empathetic background story based on the tagline.
This person was convicted of 8 counts of armed robbery. You know who should be crying? The victims of his crimes. When I read the headline I thought it would be some stupid pot conviction. This is a serious crime. People that commit armed robbery are serious criminals. This guy needs a wakeup call.
I wish to offer a view somewhat in the middle of the extremes discussed above.
I could understand her reaction better if this 17-year-old, certified as an adult, is being sent away for decades or for life.
But at this point, he can be out within as little as two years, despite apparent repeat burglaries and some history of violence.
That said, although the judge may have acted a bit too sympathetic to the defendant under the circumstances, usually there is nothing wrong in suggesting to a young moron that while he is in a cage during the next couple years that he really reflect on whether he wants to throw his life completely away, or to instead commit to turning it around.
Admittedly,that's usually a waste of effort by a judge and others, but often there is no harm in at least making the long shot attempt–unless by doing so one becomes so sympathetic to the Defendant that it demonstrates a lack of sufficient respect or compassion for victims who may be at issue.
In general, at least during her early tenure the judge may wish to tread a bit lightly as to any overt emotional displays which the DA could tag as too defendant friendly, and which the DA could then use for appellate fodder.
Based on the judge's background, and specific experiences that posters have eluded to, the DA and his deputies may(fairly or unfairly, reasonably or unreasonably)be laying in wait for any opportunity to paint the judge in such manner(too defendant friendly), and then pursue an appeal or run a writ in given cases.
So, it may possibly behoove the judge to realize that now that she is on the bench, personal and professional philosophies and leanings need to be subverted, and objectively must be strived for at all times no matter how difficult.
It's admittedly a huge adjustment. Whether a judge comes from the criminal defense realm or instead from the prosecution realm, or from Plaintiff's P.I. or instead from the insurance defense realm, it can be very difficult to turn that off like a light switch as soon as one takes the bench.
Years of career indoctrination are in operation, as well as long ingrained personal philosophies and beliefs. But, as hard as that may be to subvert it all, she and the other new judges need to strive to accomplish just that. It's called being judicial. It's called their oath.
Give her and the others time. I think they will all get there(hopefully, anyway).
6:17. Please try to be more concise next time. But I do agree with the concept that judges need to subvert their career indoctrination and personal philosophies.
When they don't strive for such objectivity, I really don't see how they can fulfill their oath. We all know some long-serving judges who never made such adjustment too well.
6:17 reads like something a 1L would write. The new judge doesn't care about anything you wrote. The court of appeals know who she is, and it'll either enter their decision-making or (more likely) it won't. The prosecutors will continue doing their meaningless jobs and continue to be called names because they have the gall to bring charges against criminals, and they'll hope against hope that no one accuses them of prosecutorial misconduct in front of any of the judges that are former PDs because they know there's a good chance it'll stick.
9:53–Although I don't necessarily agree with some of 6:17's conclusions and observations, it's at least an attempt at a fair-minded analytical approach. But your approach is just an ultra confusing scattershot approach whereby you appear to despise everyone–but perhaps the PD's office and appellate courts most of all.
Now, with your enraged,name-calling, totally indecipherable writing style, I doubt you have performed too well with appellate work, so perhaps that explains your rage toward them.
Guest
Anonymous
January 14, 2021 11:49 pm
As a former DA I used to read those PSI reports (a Defendant's Wikipedia) and I would think, "This kid never had a chance." She might have been thinking the same thing.
Guest
Anonymous
January 15, 2021 2:54 am
Do any of you know the statute that permits insurance disclosure of policy details and limits for an apartment complex in a slip and fall? I've seen the statute for vehicles, but am not certain if a premises liability statute exists- thanks.
Scott Canepa, good man, rest in peace. Good for you being a brave man to turn in the hoa scam assholes.
Yikes. Too young to die
Brave man? He did it to run one of his competitors out of business. I mean great that Nancy and Leon got caught I guess but lets not pretend that altruism was at the wheel here. Furthermore there was a lot of collateral damage to other people on the periphery of the HOA case that were ruined due to it.
It took guts for him to report it. I agrree, it was brave. He just died.
Dude had a plan and executed it; gotta admire that. He essentially invented the massive construction defect litigation machine of the '90's and '00's.
Every half-assed, donut-eating, defense schmuck who had work during that era should get down on his or her knees and say a prayer of thanks for Scott Canepa. Every mediocre insurance defense firm that opened a Vegas satellite office, every court reporter, every clueless claim adjuster, every mediator, every special master, every "expert" who made a living talking about leaky stucco needs to thank Scott Canepa. Yes, he got a lot richer than you did; but you were able to stay afloat because of his idea. Thank the good Lord for Scott Canepa and NRS Chapter 40.
Shame he went so young and missed out on many years enjoying all that dough he made.
Anyone know how he died?
^^^TRUTH^^^
Truth
Absolute truth. He provided me with a decade's worth of easy insurance billing.
Those who haven't practiced in construction defects will probably never grasp the full impact that someone like Canepa had on the state. (And likewise Duane Shinnick). It's easy to mock, but the guy did right by a lot of people, created a lot of billing opportunities for countless others in the community, and made bank along the way. He may have been a pain as opposing counsel, but there were certainly worse people to deal with who were never quite as worthy an opponent as Scott. My condolences to his family and his partners.
No mocking Canepa. He was a force. A lot of the so-called big dogs in NTLA/NJA over the past 25-30 years cut corners and worked with shady characters. No legitimate evidence that Canepa ever did anything unethical.
You mean the Medical Mafia for example?
Rest in peace, Siegfried and Canepa.
Who was implicated in HOA scandal? I only remember 4 judges and Barry Levinson.
Nancy Quon, Keith Gregory among others.
David Amesbury
Nancy and David are dead.
So is Barry Levinson.
Returning to the subject of Canepa, there were other impressive elements to his story and vision. For one, his early work establishing NRS Chapter 40 took the construction and commercial insurance industries almost completely by surprise. Carriers had, prior to Ch. 40, relied on exclusions in all their policies to withhold coverage for shoddy workmanship. They treated defect claims as uncovered contract claims and denied coverage. Prior to Ch. 40, aggrieved consumers would sue contractors and, at best, maybe get some defects repaired. Just as frequently, contractors would fold their companies or file bankruptcy to avoid liability. Insurance was rarely part of the equation.
Canepa was instrumental in forcing insurers to defend their negligent policyholders. Once on the hook for defense expenses, insurers began settling claims rather than incur massive defense costs. Eventually, insurers began, as a matter of course, settling cases for which they knew indemnity obligations were legally absent. Insurers paid many billions of dollars settling cases and passed the expense on in the form of higher premiums.
There are a few ways to look at this. On one hand, it can be viewed as an extortion. On the other hand, it can be viewed as friendly to homebuying consumers. Either way, insurance companies fed and clothed a lot of people who jumped into the massive stew of discovery and litigation. California insurance defense firms (and more than a few plaintiff attorneys) flocked to Las Vegas to get in on the action. Our legal community grew by leaps and bounds.
It was Canepa's vision which largely spawned a whole construction defect "industry" in Nevada and kept a lot of lawyers working and billing. Whether he did it to get rich (he did) or to help consumers can be debated. But many reading this likely directly or indirectly owe much of their legal careers to Canepa. And many condo owners got new windows and siding.
Canepa was controversial, but he took a shot. I suppose if you want to avoid controversy you can just do nothing. Canepa was not a guy who avoided controversy. And he somehow seemed to avoid the dirtier end of the game in which some became entangled.
Thank you.
I liked Scott personally. However saying "Canepa. . . somehow seemed to avoid the dirtier end of the game in which some became entangled" is like saying Eglet avoided the dirtier end of the Medical Mafia game. Both played in that end of their respective pools and lived to tell about it.
Eglet was publicly implicated (though never prosecuted). If Canepa ever did get his hands dirty, it never reached that level. There was never a time when it was generally known that Canepa was at risk. Eglet did have such a period; although it never came to much.
Perhaps Eglet was genuinely innocent; perhaps the feds were satisfied pinning felonies on Noel Gage, Howard Awand, Mark Kabins, and John Thalgott.
Canepa and Eglet, apples and oranges.
Craig Mueller is lead counsel on the Government Center case which should cause anyone to shiver.
What government center case?
Read the article mentioned above about toxic chemicals.
I already found a fatal error in the Complaint. It was clearly not written by an attorney who practices a lot in Nevada.
12:54 – see 11:23
So are you saying par for the course?
Off-topic: Do you guys doing injury work use a 3P vendor to obtain medical records? If so, any favorites?
http://www.Legalsupporthelp.com
I have a judge referencing a new Order opening up civil trials at the convention center that supposedly came out yesterday but I'm not seeing anything on the website. (Also 2 courtrooms in the RJC but sounds like criminal will take precedence). Anybody have a copy? She said came out yesterday, but I'm not seeing anything.
I heard the same. Just checked the Eighth Judicial website a few minutes ago and saw nothing.
Is this what you are looking for?
http://www.clarkcountycourts.us/res/rules-and-orders/2021-01-14_01_56_05_administrative%20order%2021-01.pdf
It is under the Court Rules and Administrative orders. No mention on the court's blog.
Thank you for the link. As always, the criminal defense bar has all the fun. In my next life, I am coming back a criminal defense attorney, with a big watch and bigger attitude. (Yes, I am genuinely jealous.)
So…..are short trials going? Obviously I'm asking for a friend.
Anybody have comments on the new judges now that they've taken the bench?
Rumor has is Forsberg does nothing but yell. Court staff hears her screaming in her courtroom/office nonstop. Gibson got taken out of domestic cases real fast and shuttled back to the dungeon so he can yell at parents with their kids caught up in the system instead of yelling at the paying clients upstairs. Butler can't handle her caseload so if she doesn't call your case first, plan on waiting. Burton is the new presiding in family court which means Duckworth is back to a full caseload so I guess we have that bright spot.
Appeared in front of D. Butler the other day and was very pleased with the manner in which she ran her courtroom. I don't believe Forsberg is yelling all the time.
Forsberg was already on the bench so not a new judge. And the idea of Forsberg yelling all of the time is preposterous. Animated? Maybe. Loud? Quite possible. Yelling and screaming? Nah.
All I know is that Jeff Epstein didn't kill himself.
She most certainly does yell and scream. It's very shrill, painful to listen to.
What happened to Siegfried & Roy?
Siegfried died today from cancer. Roy died last year with covid complications.
No! OMG. Very sad. Three Nevada top men dead in the same week: Canepa, Sheldon, and now Siegfried. Nein!! Rest in Peace, gentlemen.
It's a shame Siegfried and Roy both died within a year or two of each other, and I recognize they brought a lot of joy to many people, and they were true Vegas icons.
I, however, was not a fan. The show itself was old-time corn-ball Vegas showmanship of the most lame sort. It was a big nothing tied up in a showy, pleasant package.
It was always touted as a must see for all tourists as well as locals.
Admittedly, it was elaborate, costly, they had agreeable personalities, and the Tigers were the true highlight of the show.
But as far as the actual illusions, they seemed lame beyond measure despite the audience erupting in the expected ecstatic applause after each stunt.
I saw budget illusions who were far better and presented far more intriguing and baffling tricks that were far more difficult to decipher as to how it was accomplished.
But the "magic" or "illusions" of S & L were dreadful beyond measure in my humble opinion. For example,we were meant to wonder how one of them got from inside a coffin to standing upright on the opposite end of the stage with us seeing none of how it was accomplished. Well, they would darken the stage during the stunt so it was impossible to see what happened, so he could have simply climbed out of the coffin and walked across the stage during the 45 seconds the stage was pitch black. Then the lights came on and he'd triumphantly raise his arms while the audience exploded in raptured bliss.
So, as illusionists and magicians they really left much to be desired. As far as the total package as a "show", again, the animal part was kind of cool and unique.
Anyone who remembers the show share my opinion on how really dreadful and amateurish the "magic" or "illusions" were?
Never saw their show. I saw David Copperfield and felt the same way but I still had a fantastic time.
I saw S&R and believe 2:55 is being far too charitable.
Never wanted to go, but my wife always wanted to go and insisted I take her on her birthday one year. Them working with the animals was kind of cool and cute, but I found the actual illusions even more preposterous than 2:55 finds them.
The one I specifically remember as being so truly awful was the one 2:55 just explained. One of them gets out of the box and winds up on the other end of the stage. My goodness, how on earth did he do it!?
Well, not too hard to figure out as the stage went pitch black for the better part of a minute. So, dare I suggest that during that minute of total darkness he merely pushed open the coffin lid, climbed out, and walked across the stage?
The last two comments reminds me why I am blessed to have an almost childlike naiveté. I was bedazzled and amused watching the show at the Mirage 25+ years ago. My date and I then held hands watching the volcano for a while. It was a wonderful evening.
3:19–Because it was a romantic evening you were not looking at the show in a critical sense, nor should you have been.
I,like,3:19,also enjoyed the volcano with a date. I also am tempted to report that we enjoyed the pirate ship battle as well, but I found out subsequently that to enjoy the pirate ship battle was racist.
I never knew why till years later someone explained the display was named after Sir Francis Drake, who, among other things, was a slave trader. So, I see the point. But all this(the racist implications) could have been avoided if rather than naming it the Sir Francis Drake Pirate Ship Battle(or whatever it was precisely called), they just dropped his name and called it "Pirate Ship Battle."
But because Drake's name was attached to it, the pirate ship battle was dropped. Never to be seen again.
These exhibits were during a time in the 90's when they were attempting to make Vegas a little more family friendly by having things the children could enjoy as well. That project and philosophy did not last long, but I did not find the concept to be the total failure some found it to be. For one, I enjoyed that Star Trek Experience as well, or whatever it was called.
Ah, the Star Trek experience. I had friends visit Vegas and insist – nay, demand! – we go there. Geeks.
"But because Drake's name was attached to it, the pirate ship battle was dropped. Never to be seen again." That is not true. The show was dropped in a rebranding of the hotel which tried to go younger and sexier with the Sirens of TI show. The Pirate Battle featured a battle between pirates aboard the Hispaniola and British sailors aboard HMS Britannia. It is true that Steve Wynn had the name of the British ship changed from He even changed the name of the British ship from HMS Sir Francis Drake to HMS Brittania after members of the black community suggested that Drake was a slave trader; however that occurred in 1993 before the show ever debuted.
The Government Center toxic tort complaint is subject to an immediate motion to dismiss.
Every defense lawyer files motions to dismiss as an automatic reaction to a complaint.
Ain't that the truth, brother. Got to make their billing.
Yes but this motion to dismiss will have merit.
She's crying over a 24-60 month plea deal after the defendant robbed someone? I was expecting a much more empathetic background story based on the tagline.
She's a bleeding heart leftist. What do you expect?
Yeah, it is horrible to mourn the foolish decisions of a youth and to hope for better for them. . .
Oh the humanity!! A judge with empathy!! What on earth are we going to do now?!
What happens if she has to sentence someone for a much more serious crime, such as rape, robbery or murder?
Are we gonna see a full blown meltdown, wigging out, hostages taken, drug relapse, rehab, a book, etc. on the part of the Judge?
This person was convicted of 8 counts of armed robbery. You know who should be crying? The victims of his crimes. When I read the headline I thought it would be some stupid pot conviction. This is a serious crime. People that commit armed robbery are serious criminals. This guy needs a wakeup call.
Sounds like I voted fro the right person, let's get rid of the rest of the bad ones, except Denton.
I wish to offer a view somewhat in the middle of the extremes discussed above.
I could understand her reaction better if this 17-year-old, certified as an adult, is being sent away for decades or for life.
But at this point, he can be out within as little as two years, despite apparent repeat burglaries and some history of violence.
That said, although the judge may have acted a bit too sympathetic to the defendant under the circumstances, usually there is nothing wrong in suggesting to a young moron that while he is in a cage during the next couple years that he really reflect on whether he wants to throw his life completely away, or to instead commit to turning it around.
Admittedly,that's usually a waste of effort by a judge and others, but often there is no harm in at least making the long shot attempt–unless by doing so one becomes so sympathetic to the Defendant that it demonstrates a lack of sufficient respect or compassion for victims who may be at issue.
In general, at least during her early tenure the judge may wish to tread a bit lightly as to any overt emotional displays which the DA could tag as too defendant friendly, and which the DA could then use for appellate fodder.
Based on the judge's background, and specific experiences that posters have eluded to, the DA and his deputies may(fairly or unfairly, reasonably or unreasonably)be laying in wait for any opportunity to paint the judge in such manner(too defendant friendly), and then pursue an appeal or run a writ in given cases.
So, it may possibly behoove the judge to realize that now that she is on the bench, personal and professional philosophies and leanings need to be subverted, and objectively must be strived for at all times no matter how difficult.
It's admittedly a huge adjustment. Whether a judge comes from the criminal defense realm or instead from the prosecution realm, or from Plaintiff's P.I. or instead from the insurance defense realm, it can be very difficult to turn that off like a light switch as soon as one takes the bench.
Years of career indoctrination are in operation, as well as long ingrained personal philosophies and beliefs. But, as hard as that may be to subvert it all, she and the other new judges need to strive to accomplish just that. It's called being judicial. It's called their oath.
Give her and the others time. I think they will all get there(hopefully, anyway).
6:17. Please try to be more concise next time. But I do agree with the concept that judges need to subvert their career indoctrination and personal philosophies.
When they don't strive for such objectivity, I really don't see how they can fulfill their oath. We all know some long-serving judges who never made such adjustment too well.
6:17 reads like something a 1L would write. The new judge doesn't care about anything you wrote. The court of appeals know who she is, and it'll either enter their decision-making or (more likely) it won't. The prosecutors will continue doing their meaningless jobs and continue to be called names because they have the gall to bring charges against criminals, and they'll hope against hope that no one accuses them of prosecutorial misconduct in front of any of the judges that are former PDs because they know there's a good chance it'll stick.
9:53–Although I don't necessarily agree with some of 6:17's conclusions and observations, it's at least an attempt at a fair-minded analytical approach. But your approach is just an ultra confusing scattershot approach whereby you appear to despise everyone–but perhaps the PD's office and appellate courts most of all.
Now, with your enraged,name-calling, totally indecipherable writing style, I doubt you have performed too well with appellate work, so perhaps that explains your rage toward them.
As a former DA I used to read those PSI reports (a Defendant's Wikipedia) and I would think, "This kid never had a chance." She might have been thinking the same thing.
Do any of you know the statute that permits insurance disclosure of policy details and limits for an apartment complex in a slip and fall? I've seen the statute for vehicles, but am not certain if a premises liability statute exists- thanks.
There isn't one
There is one. Just have to provide a HIPAA.
What is the statute then?
There isn't one. The only statute regarding disclosure of limits (690B) is specific to motor vehicle accidents.
Thank you, that's why I couldn't find anything!
Does anyone know what the cause of death was for Scott Canepa? So sad to hear, I just found out today.