Being Green

  • Law

  • After years of build up and just three weeks of trial, jury deliberations begin today in the HOA scandal trial. [RJ]
  • The Nevada Legislature introduced over 120 bills yesterday including one to do away with residency requirements for divorce and one to approve the Equal Rights Amendment. [RJ]
  • Attorney/State Senator Tick Segerblom introduced a bill to permit industrial marijuana farming. [KNPR]
  • If you haven’t been following the HBO documentary “The Jinx,” it took an interesting turn of events with the subject being arrested the weekend of the finale and the finale episode including what sounds like a possible off-camera, but on-mic confession. [RJ]
  • More details on the shooting of Tammy Meyers from the grand jury transcript. [8NewsNow]
44 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 4:40 pm

This post is addressed to the BLOG and the BLOG ADMINISTRATORS. A question has arisen regarding whether an attorney representing a client in federal court/proceedings is required to be a member of the Nevada Bar. The most notable example are IMMIGRATION lawyers. There is one immigration advocacy organization that is providing legal advice and representation and the attorney is licensed elsewhere. Did District Court Judge Gloria Navarro submit a request to Bar Counsel and the State Bar about this? I would like to see a thread about this and related issues. Thanks

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 5:01 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Totally the norm for federal practice like immigration and even bankruptcy I believe. No need to shout!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 5:38 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It was always my understanding that for immigration, if you had to file stuff or appear in immigration court, you didn't have to be licensed by the state, but if you appeared in federal court, you would need to be.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 6:05 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This is governed by the Local Rules of each federal district court. The court can require local counsel or not. Local Rule 10-2 governs. The lawyer cannot be a resident of Nevada or regularly employed in Nevada (exceptions are provided for AUSAs and AFPDs)

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 6:20 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The court can waive any of the Local Rules also LR 1A 3-1. There is a provision for emeritus pro bono attorneys also.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

There are immigration lawyers who are not admitted in Nevada who are getting all kinds of legal work from immigrants. It is a real problem. The exception started with AUSAs from the strike force working with the local US Attorney. Then local AUSAs were permitted to appear without a Nevada license. Now it is stretched to lawyers who have an office here and appear on immigration matters. When will it end. Glenn Lerner got in trouble for having an Arizona licensed writing a letter in Nevada. The rule against foreign counsel needs to be enforced before we become a suburb of Los Angeles.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:55 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

ROFLMAO! Illegal, er, undocumented lawyers helping illegal, er, undocumented immigrants. Super! Really, why do licensing and immigration documentation rules exist? To exclude. To exclude our fellow man. Abolish it all. Fling open the gates and let humanity freely choose its destiny.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 9:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This is federal court, for heavens sake, most Nevada lawyers have no experience in federal court. What exactly is the policy reason for requiring a Nevada license?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 1:55 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

To resolve one issue from the original question – in Bankruptcy court, one has to be licensed in Nevada and admitted into Nevada US District Court to practice, unless a pro hac vice application is filed and approved.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 7:10 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Thanks about bankruptcy. What difference is there really between a foreign licensed attorney appearing in state court versus federal court. None really. So don't understand how it is strictly enforced in state court but apparently not enforced in federal court. Pro hac vice should be required for both. The unauthorized practice of law is the unauthorized practice of law. I was helping a relative fight some debt collectors but was prohibited from acting as her attorney because not licensed in California. So I got her an attorney in California. Why should it be different here?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 7:26 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The federal court can define who can practice in front of it in any way they want. The federal courts are not required to defer to the State Bar or state court.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 11:34 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Some federal district courts do not require an attorney to be admitted to the bar of the state in which the district is located in order to be admitted to practice in the federal district court. The federal district courts in both Colorado and North Dakota are an example. You do have to be admitted to the bar of some state in order to apply, just not the state in which those federal district courts are located.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 11:41 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Same thing with Federal Public Defenders. Some dcts require admission to the state court bar (Cent Dist CA) other courts do not. (NV). And for those of you who think it is essential, what State Bar would you require for appearances in the Ninth Circuit?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 19, 2015 2:35 am
Reply to  Anonymous

No brainer here. Ninth Circuit–would require the home state from which the appeal is taken or the District–District of Nevada–Nevada–bar. When I was an attorney for the federal government they required admission to the States whee we practiced. We had attorneys for each states and some were licensed for all states. What is the big deal with that?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 4:59 pm

Anyone have a list of the attorneys recently attending ortho doctor Andrew Scott Martin's parties haha

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 5:13 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I don't have the list of attorneys, but your momma was there.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 6:21 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

My mom says the parties were off the hook. You can imagine how upset I am that she never extended me an invite. Parents can be soooo selfish. Just ask her granddaughter.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 6:37 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Yeah, it sucks when mom hogs all the ecstasy and coke for herself.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 7:29 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This strange story reminds me of the LV PD who serviced a child molester client in prison. I guess some gals just love the excitement factor. It's not just doctors who can pull off the strange.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 9:18 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

So what ever happened to the infamous Stacy Roundtree?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 10:59 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Here she is: http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/75226-tx-stacey-roundtree-4283028.html

Make sure you scroll down to the professional misconduct section…

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 11:57 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Wasn't she caught messing around with clients/inmates?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 10:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Not sure if the AVVO information really relates to its ability to check up on participating members or the fact that she was never actually charged with anything, including a professional misconduct claim. As I recall the jail banned her from entry and so she either quit her job or was terminated because a criminal defense attorney must be able to go into the jail.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 6:09 pm

If you want to kill some billable hours today, you can watch continuing interviews of judicial candidates for the EJDC at nvcourts.com. Mary Perry is up next at 11:25, followed by the incomparable Bonnie Bulla at 1:15. Then the hits just keep coming with John G. Watkins and Joe Hardy.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:15 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

nvcourts.gov is the site. that nvcourts.com is something weird. Don't go to it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 7:20 pm

Oh, well. Shutting off ESPN 1100 forever. How liberating.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 7:25 pm

CBS Am 1140 is better anyway.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:23 pm

Commissioner Bulla just referred to the previous Discovery Commissioner (Biggar) as being Beecroft. In any event, Chief Justice Hardesty did not question Commissioner Bulla at all. The lay person committee member is questioning Commissioner Bulla about not ever running in an election.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:35 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

this is great. she's full of it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

She seems to have discovered humility and a good hairstylist. Nice. Bulla for the Bench! I vote yes.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:35 pm

Lay person asks about "frivilous lawsuits". Jebus, where do they find these people? I'm guessing the questioner is COMPLETELY unaware of Rule 11.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 6:28 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Totally, because Rule 11 sanctions are strictly enforced by our judiciary.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 6:31 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Not.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:38 pm

Bulla is a beast without a tail. I think I saw her getting funky at a Dr. Martin party one time. Nobody liked her there either…and she had a mask on!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:55 pm

Hardesty thinks judges should decide opposed motions to dismiss without oral argument. Bulla wants to hear argument, even if they have to sit there for 4 hours for a 5 minute argument.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 8:56 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

This is a fun video feed. Bulla is a triage nurse in discovery ER!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 9:03 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Actually, it was an opposed Motion to Amend he was suggesting, but it raises an interesting point anyway. Why does Clark County allow oral argument on every motion? Hardesty says it is the only county in the state that does it that way.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 10:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hardesty is right. It is a huge drain on client money and judicial resources to force every attorney to sit through a stacked calendar of often mundane matters, many of which could be and should be decided on the briefing, just so a judge can get extra face time with the constituents. It also diminishes the importance of written advocacy. If the judge would be assisted by oral argument, he or she can set it; and if the parties want oral argument, they can request it (but the judge should not be compelled to grant it). Let's lighten up the elevator line and allow the peace and quiet that prevails in federal court to take effect (at least for the floors above the muni and justice court functions) at the RJC.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 10:48 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Ha ha, "peace and quiet" at Federal Court. At least our EJDC rules on motions. In Fed Ct you can wait over a year or more for a ruling from judges who have two law clerks instead of EJDC's one, and has 15% of the case load. Lazy bums. "Oh, look at me, I have life time tenure. You can't make me work."

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 10:15 pm

Joe Hardy is getting lots of questions about his youth (he's 42).

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2015 11:56 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Friedberg is old and decrepit; that doesn't make him a qualified candidate.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 18, 2015 12:39 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I thought Hardy, Watkins and Skupa all interviewed quite well. Hardy and Watkins had a somewhat more outgoing and friendly approach, while Skupa was slightly more reserved–although he relaxed more to the end and personalized things a bit more. Between Hardy and Watkins, both appeared to be quite well-liked by the panel, and the panel appeared, in general, to be quite impressed with their careers. However, since Watkins had more public, memorable cases in the Criminal Law realm, several of which garnered significant media attention at the time, the panel was quite interested in discussing those cases. That could possibly bode quite well for Watkins. Also, although he has handled more Criminal Law matters than any other area, he does have a fair amount of civil experience in his long career. Joe Hardy does not seem to have significant Criminal Law experience, and it will be a blended Civil/Criminal calendar. But he seems to be a favorite of the panel, and for good reason. But although those three were really effective, I then saw Chris Davis, and unfortunately, I don't think he was all that effective. He made a lengthy point about how a District Court Judge's courtroom is a "kingdom" and he was quite lengthy as to that point. I understand his point to be that on account of him viewing it that way, that such position therefore requires great responsibility and such power must be exercised judiciously and with great care. But he didn't put too much emphasis on this later point, but instead put too much emphasis on the former point–that the judgeship is a kingdom. Therefore, his point was subject to misconstrue. And in fact Commission member Williams then followed up, something to the effect, "You discussed that you would view this judgeship as a kingdom…" Davis then had a golden opportunity to clarify that the broader point he was making was that significant power must be tempered by prudence, humility, proportion, compassion, etc. But he did not, so he left it hanging as a lingering question for the panel–would Davis view the position as his own private fiefdom?
I didn't see Commissioner Bulla's interview, but I assume she is in the mix as well. Eric Johnson interviews tomorrow so that should be worth watching.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 19, 2015 2:09 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Congratulations to Joe Hardy on the Commission's nomination for his appointment as district court judge, now awaiting the Governor's kind consideration.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
March 19, 2015 2:32 am

Double picks–Joe Hardy and Eric Johnson (Susan Johnson's husband by the way). Mary Chapman and Karl Armstrong???????