- Quickdraw McLaw
- 34 Comments
- 184 Views
- Here’s a look at new laws that went into effect on January 1, 2022. [TNI]
- Man is still trying to recoup $150K for which his attorney Scott Cantor was charged with theft. [RJ]
- DMV tries combatting online sale of hard-to-get appointments. [RJ]
- What kind of resolutions did you set for yourself this year?
Everyone is busy cleaning out their inbox from the last week of not working
The Bar just posted that the annual meeting is in Sonoma, California. That is a very lovely location. For the dozens of you that attend, make sure to check out Mission Sonoma, which is the northern most Spanish Mission in California.
I would like to go to the annual meeting, but I lack the time and money to do so. The cynic in me suspects that these meetings are made deliberately inaccessible to keep participation insular.
Seems like the annual meeting of the State Bar of Nevada should alternate between Las Vegas and Reno. This would allow members of the State Bar of Nevada to reasonable attend the meeting at least every other year without having to expend substantial time and funds to attend.
Agreed. It really is an event for the in crowd to party together on our dues/dime.
Sounds like the BOG should prepare a report stating the cost of the out of state annual meeting and how much the dues would be decreased if the annual meeting was held in LV or Reno. Heck the BOG should pass a resolution at the very next meeting requiring the annual meeting to be held in Nevada. Why not dump some money into the rural Nevada economies by holding the meeting in a rural location?
They already publish this and the Annual Meeting generally has a net a positive income.
Also, have you ever tried to plan a convention in Las Vegas? Do you know how expensive it is and the minimum guaranteed numbers (food and bev minimums/room blocks) you have to have? That's why neither the NJA nor the SBN have their conventions here.
Isn't it trendy to support local businesses in these economic times? Way to go BOG!
Years ago there was a rule that the convention had to be held in-state in alternating years. That fell by the wayside somehow, but I thought it was a good compromise and should have been maintained.
In 1984, then Justice Gunderson spearheaded a bunch of Bar Assoc. reforms (election by the Board of the President vs. just moving up with time) including a requirement that every other convention be held in Nevada. We had one in Laughlin and one in Las Vegas I think. Attendance was pathetic. Over the years many of the reforms have been rescinded including that one.
@ 3:06pm, the family law section already does that with its annual bacchanal in Ely.
I can't believe anyone makes the "we tried it in Laughlin in 1984 and it didn't work" argument.
1984.
Are you people being serious?
Also, "Laughlin." Why not Tahoe? Or Genoa? Or Red Rock? Or the freaking Las Vegas strip?
Boulder City, Northtown, Pahrump, Elko.
I'm not sure how an inexpensive, short flight to SF or Oaktown is deliberately inaccessible…
I know right? Now something like BALI – THAT would be pretty expensive and inaccessible. But awesome nonetheless.
2:16 PM here.
I have been to Sonoma many times. Almost certainly more than any commenter in this discussion. Yes, getting to Sonoma is just as simple as a flight to San Francisco. And then the 1-1.5 hour (or more, depending on traffic) drive to Sonoma. And accommodations in Sonoma, which, you will probably not be surprised to learn are not cheap. And then there's taking off all that time from my practice. Time is the bigger barrier to attendance for most of us. But the proof is in the pudding. There are around 8,000 active attorneys in Nevada. At best, a couple hundred will attend this. Because. It. Is. DELIBERATELY. INACCESSIBLE.
It is deliberately inaccessible to attorneys of color by not making it local.
2:16 PM here. Not sure whether it is or isn't accessible to attorneys of color, but I can tell you that I'm the whitest, honkiest, George Strait-singing-in-the-shower, no paprika on my potato salad, tucked in shirt with my shorts white person there is and it isn't accessible to me.
We live in a country with discriminatory State Bars and courts.
There's a nonstop from Harry Reid to Sonoma and it's driving distance from Reno.
6:58- What do you mean that it is deliberately inaccessible to attorneys of color? Are we supposed to jump to conclusions by you making this statement?
758 is Carson city. Aclu privileged.
Does perma mail-in voting favor Ds or Rs?
The more people who vote, the more Ds get elected. Mail in ballots favor Ds because people who normally can't get time off to vote or don't have transportation to the polls or are disabled and have trouble standing in line are all able to vote. That's why the Rs are trying to stop mail in ballots.
That's not true. Mail-in voting increases overall turnout (for obvious reasons: people are more likely to vote when it's easy), but it does not favor one party or the other. Republicans win in high turnout elections too (e.g. VA gov 2021).
Republicans do not like mail-in voting because they lost one particular race that they care about more than any other race, and that race happened to involve a lot of mail-in voting.
Perma mail-in voting, especially the kinda where every single registered voter in Nevada gets mailed a ballot, favors Democrats. Voter fraud and unsecured elections is the Dem Party's bread and butter. With mass ballots mailed out without even verifying whether the voter actually lives at the address, you can be assured that many fraudulent ballots will be harvested, signed, mailed and counted in with no accountability. With such an unsecured system, there can be only be a presumption of voter fraud.
Voter suppression is the bread and butter of the republican party. When workers who can't take time off to go to the polls, when disabled people can't get to the polls, when hourly workers can't vote, and when students don't get to vote, republicans win. When wealthy, salaried employees who can take time off to vote, when boomers, and when business owners are the only people who can take time off to vote in person, republicans win. When everyone who is eligible gets to vote, democrats win.
The last two republicans elected to the presidency were NOT elected by a majority of Americans. They were elected by the electoral college.
My resolution is to take positive steps to reverse the damage this profession has done to my mental and physical health.
I'm doing the by resolving to find a new career this year. Sunk costs be damned.
I am sorry to hear you say this about your chosen field. Do you think you will be able to earn as much as you do now? Is there another field of law you could practice that could be more rewarding? I am in government employment so perhaps I am clueless because I do not have to bill and chase the almighty dollar.
I still do not understand how Frierson got permanent mail-in voting through without a 2/3 majority. It costs a ton of money and wastes a ton of money. Look what percentage of mail-in ballots were turned in during the 2020 election – 38%.
38% turned in, during a pandemic. At a cost of approx $2 per ballot, meaning $2.2M just thrown down the drain.
Maybe the voters should have had a say in whether we switch to permanent mail-in voting?
If you're an attorney, this is a very poorly reasoned argument. You've left out a ton of information that is necessary to make an informed decision. To start, what's the cost of running an in-person election? What's the average in-person election turn out percentages? A 1L could make a better reasoned argument than you did.
Voters did have a say. We elected the legislature and the executive and they passed the bill. That's how our democracy (republic) works.
The two-thirds requirement only applies to bills that generate or increase state revenue. Spending money only takes a majority. Raising taxes takes two-thirds.
Family Law Conference was moved to Bishop, California in 2017. I would prefer to support our local businesses.