+1 to the blog overlords for the post titles so far this week (looking forward to the coming days)
Guest
Anonymous
March 21, 2023 6:28 pm
Our Nevada Legislature is trying to fundamentally change the practice of law in Nevada:
SB335 and SB340 would get rid of summary evictions.
SB78 lowers the statute of limitations to file a complaint for unpaid rent down to 7 months and requires you to file the complaint in small claims court (bye bye attorney fees! This isn't the first or last time that they'll force certain types of cases to small claims court to ruin our profession by taking away attorney fees. They did it to medical debt a few years ago and they'll do it to other type cases next time if we continue to let them get away with it.)
SB276 both changes the definition of the practice of law and basically gets rid of notice pleading for certain types of cases. (This might not be your practice field now but they'll push fact pleadings for other cases soon.)
Reading the text of SB 335, it doesn't appear to get rid of summary evictions, but simply revises the processes for obtaining them. Regarding attorney's fees, I don't believe there are ordinarily any attorney's fees available for fighting an eviction on the renter side (there were some exceptions for wrongful evictions during COVID but those are mainly over), so taking away attorney's fees on the landlord side of the ledger would just level the playing field.
@2:47 – SB 335 makes summary evictions no longer "summary." There are generally no attorneys fees in summary evictions now but SB 78 would get rid of attorneys fees for normal unpaid rent cases that are filed after the summary eviction.
So there is a contractual provision in leases that states that prevailing party shall be entitled to their attorneys' fees. We are going to basically void that provision of the contract. We are going to void the statutes that state that prevailing parties shall be entitled to fees and costs in Justice Court.
This all may be a lot of handwringing over nothing. During the hearing on the bill, SB78's sponsor offered an amendment that takes out the fees language in Section 7(2) of the bill that is apparently being read to prohibit an award of attorney's fees to the landlord if the landlord prevails in an action for eviction.
As a practical matter, if an individual is being evicted from their home for failing to pay rent how likely is it that they would actually ever pay attorney's fees, even if awarded?
Exactly. I'm a former property manager. The answer is there is a ZERO percent chance that you collect attorneys fees from an evicted tenant. They are broke deadbeats. The key to evictions is to screen tenants aggressively so that you don't have to ever evict. Only rent to tenants with no felonies, no evictions, good references and steady employment.
I am a lawyer who does LL/T. Answer to the issue of collecting attorneys' fees, damages above the security deposit or other damages is purely a matter of the collectability of the tenant. Some tenants are broke deadbeats. Some of people who have been playing the system (especially over the past 3 years). Some are people who are quite collectable. Screening tenants is a start (although that ends up in the circumstance where some tenants become deemed unrentable). Big security deposits. Faster remedies to get the bad tenants out (not slower remedies as is proposed in SB78).
The problem with low income housing tenant screening is that it screens out exactly those who need charity the most, the dregs and down-and-out crowd. To rent to these folks, you need both compassion and strength. Let them in but do not hesitate to throw them out. That's how the best servants of this consumer class make a decent ROI while providing quality housing. All hail Siegel!
2:36, Where did you get "low income" screening from this discussion?
Guest
Anonymous
March 21, 2023 6:40 pm
Who is sponsoring these bills? Who is pushing them? Is it Barbara Buckley & LACSN? How much money, all told, does LACSN get from the state bar? How much from taxpayers? Isn't there also a bill to increase filing fees so that even more money will go to LACSN?
They're a nonprofit, shouldn't this be public info? How about you do your own research and let us know? Not being too snarky here, it would be interesting to know in light of how huge they are. Some other commenter said 80 lawyers??? What other law firm in town has that many lawyers?
Yes, but I am tired of every office or appointment being prefaced by gender or race. If you really want neutral merit based appointments of judges, stop talking about gender or race as if it were a qualification.
Many of the criticisms of DH here are unfair and harsh. That said, his public speaking skills are exceptionally weak, disorganized, disjointed and painful to listen to. Did he spend any time preparing those remarks, substantively or rhetorically?
OBC has made the practice of law a living hell. I’m preparing to relocate out of here. I’d rather sit for a bar exam again than deal w Dan Hooge. These proposed rule changes are a harbinger of much worse to come. Thank you Dennis Kennedy.
Said it before, worth saying again. The SBN and OBC should be uncoupled. SBN should represent the members of the Bar in hearings such as the one discussed and matters affecting members and their practices.
+1 to the blog overlords for the post titles so far this week (looking forward to the coming days)
Our Nevada Legislature is trying to fundamentally change the practice of law in Nevada:
SB335 and SB340 would get rid of summary evictions.
SB78 lowers the statute of limitations to file a complaint for unpaid rent down to 7 months and requires you to file the complaint in small claims court (bye bye attorney fees! This isn't the first or last time that they'll force certain types of cases to small claims court to ruin our profession by taking away attorney fees. They did it to medical debt a few years ago and they'll do it to other type cases next time if we continue to let them get away with it.)
SB276 both changes the definition of the practice of law and basically gets rid of notice pleading for certain types of cases. (This might not be your practice field now but they'll push fact pleadings for other cases soon.)
Meh.
Reading the text of SB 335, it doesn't appear to get rid of summary evictions, but simply revises the processes for obtaining them. Regarding attorney's fees, I don't believe there are ordinarily any attorney's fees available for fighting an eviction on the renter side (there were some exceptions for wrongful evictions during COVID but those are mainly over), so taking away attorney's fees on the landlord side of the ledger would just level the playing field.
@2:47 – SB 335 makes summary evictions no longer "summary." There are generally no attorneys fees in summary evictions now but SB 78 would get rid of attorneys fees for normal unpaid rent cases that are filed after the summary eviction.
So there is a contractual provision in leases that states that prevailing party shall be entitled to their attorneys' fees. We are going to basically void that provision of the contract. We are going to void the statutes that state that prevailing parties shall be entitled to fees and costs in Justice Court.
6:12, are you referring to Section 7 of SB78?
6:12, isn't that a Contracts Clause violation? How can the legislature rewrite leases? (Assuming what has been said is accurate about the bill.)
This all may be a lot of handwringing over nothing. During the hearing on the bill, SB78's sponsor offered an amendment that takes out the fees language in Section 7(2) of the bill that is apparently being read to prohibit an award of attorney's fees to the landlord if the landlord prevails in an action for eviction.
As a practical matter, if an individual is being evicted from their home for failing to pay rent how likely is it that they would actually ever pay attorney's fees, even if awarded?
Exactly. I'm a former property manager. The answer is there is a ZERO percent chance that you collect attorneys fees from an evicted tenant. They are broke deadbeats. The key to evictions is to screen tenants aggressively so that you don't have to ever evict. Only rent to tenants with no felonies, no evictions, good references and steady employment.
I am a lawyer who does LL/T. Answer to the issue of collecting attorneys' fees, damages above the security deposit or other damages is purely a matter of the collectability of the tenant. Some tenants are broke deadbeats. Some of people who have been playing the system (especially over the past 3 years). Some are people who are quite collectable. Screening tenants is a start (although that ends up in the circumstance where some tenants become deemed unrentable). Big security deposits. Faster remedies to get the bad tenants out (not slower remedies as is proposed in SB78).
The problem with low income housing tenant screening is that it screens out exactly those who need charity the most, the dregs and down-and-out crowd. To rent to these folks, you need both compassion and strength. Let them in but do not hesitate to throw them out. That's how the best servants of this consumer class make a decent ROI while providing quality housing. All hail Siegel!
2:36, Where did you get "low income" screening from this discussion?
Who is sponsoring these bills? Who is pushing them? Is it Barbara Buckley & LACSN? How much money, all told, does LACSN get from the state bar? How much from taxpayers? Isn't there also a bill to increase filing fees so that even more money will go to LACSN?
They're a nonprofit, shouldn't this be public info? How about you do your own research and let us know? Not being too snarky here, it would be interesting to know in light of how huge they are. Some other commenter said 80 lawyers??? What other law firm in town has that many lawyers?
When are the interviews for Family Court C?
March 30
OMG. Hardesty is now addressing the Court. Can't this guy just go away?
Agreed, but isn't cool that 5 of the 7 justices are women. The court has such a different look now.
Yes, but I am tired of every office or appointment being prefaced by gender or race. If you really want neutral merit based appointments of judges, stop talking about gender or race as if it were a qualification.
Poor OBC, to hear Mr. Hooge tell it, they're in the most unfortunate position in the whole state.
Many of the criticisms of DH here are unfair and harsh. That said, his public speaking skills are exceptionally weak, disorganized, disjointed and painful to listen to. Did he spend any time preparing those remarks, substantively or rhetorically?
This Dennis Kennedy guy is making some good points. Slamming the recent credo and repping all of us.
YES. THANK YOU DENNIS KENNEDY!
Who is the guy sitting behind Rob Bare? His facial expressions are adding much to the record.
OBC has made the practice of law a living hell. I’m preparing to relocate out of here. I’d rather sit for a bar exam again than deal w Dan Hooge. These proposed rule changes are a harbinger of much worse to come. Thank you Dennis Kennedy.
It sucks Rob Bare wasn't retained. He's the type of people we should have as judges.
You can't unring the bell, but you can adjust the volume. I hope the Court recognizes the significance of these comments.
Said it before, worth saying again. The SBN and OBC should be uncoupled. SBN should represent the members of the Bar in hearings such as the one discussed and matters affecting members and their practices.
Anyone know where you can find the video from yesterday's comments?
Once it's available, I expect it will show up here: https://nvcourts.gov/supreme/arguments/public_hearing_recordings
Otherwise, the 14 minute ONJ clip is the only one I've seen.
Dennis Kennedy is one of the finest lawyers I’ve ever had the privilege of meeting. He is the authority on this stuff.
When is Pickering leaving?