Built For Cars, Not People

  • Law
  • U.S. Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler is up for reappointment and the court is seeking comments. [RJ]
  • Las Vegas is one of the nation’s most dangerous cities for pedestrians, study says. [RJ]
  • Inmate dies at Las Vegas hospital, officials say. [RJ]
administrator
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 10:25 am

I have been in front of Weksler and found her to be thorough and fair. and most importantly, timely in her rulings.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 11:48 am
Reply to  Anonymous

What does everyone think about Elayna Youchah?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 1:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I had a case before her where she was reviewing the merits of the claims (related to whether to grant a discovery stay). Her legal analysis was just bizarre. Took seriously claims that a law student could tell you were hopeless while disregarding claims that seemed pretty strong. This isn’t sour grapes – some of her findings helped us and some hurt. Her analysis was just divorced from actual law/precedent.

I’m also not a huge fan of her demeanor and think she’s a bit inflexible. But she’s not terrible in those respects.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 12:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Agreed. She is also very active in the mentorship of law students and new attorneys.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 4:30 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

She’s awesome!!!!!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 12:04 pm

Colleagues,

off topic – The State Bar is preparing a petition asking the Nevada Supreme Court to amend the Supreme Court Rules relating to attorney discipline and to allow a self-contained set of Disciplinary Rules of Procedure. Basically, Bar Counsel seeks to remove any reliance on, or protections afforded by NRCP in any disciplinary hearing. Bar Counsel is complaining about the length of time it takes to get to a disciplinary trial, and the length of the trial itself. There is also the suggestion that pre-trial motion practice should be extremely limited, if allowed at all. The impact of this cannot be overstated.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 12:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Frightening.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 1:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Ick. Water is wet and due process is inconvenient for those wielding a hammer.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 1:59 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That proves the point. SBN does not represent the interest of its members. It is a regulatory and discipline organization oriented towards controlling aspects of the practice of law, only incidentally providing something for members, such as CLE.
We need a separate organization that has a single purpose, advocate for its lawyer members. Such an organization would be taking steps to block the things like you have mentioned. Such an organization would have also opposed the new bar admission testing.
Individually we (you/me) have no power.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 2:09 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Let’s talk it over in Hawaii, Sonoma or NYC.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 3:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

To paraphrase George Carlin: The Nevada Bar governors, bar counsel, LACSN, and the Nevada Supreme Court Justices are a club, and you ain’t in it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 7:17 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Do they not teach the difference between rights and obligations in law school anymore? Or even the difference between shall and may?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 6:28 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

hahaha have you ever seen a pre-trial motion by the defendant granted from a Chair hahaha. They already ignore any “rights” in NRCP.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 6:42 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Yes. And then the NSC reversed it because it was wrong. Your point?

And what are these “rights” bestowed by the NRCPs you speak?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 7:51 am
Reply to  Anonymous

So you saw it once? Kind of helps my point right? And almost all procedures have an initial basis in a right somewhere. And no I’m not AV rated and in the matrimonial club but I do have many leather bound books.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 2:27 pm

What is the procedure for getting a lien for attorney’s fees/costs in this scenario: An attorney left my firm and took a client. Before leaving, they racked up a bunch of fees/costs which remain outstanding at my firm. It is an active PI case. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 3:28 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

As long as the written agreement with the client was also with the Firm, then follow the procedure in NRS 18.015. It should matter not whether the client discharged the Firm when the atty left.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2026 9:11 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Google can give you this answer, but if you don’t know how to properly lien a file, then I am concerned for your clients as it is a simple statute and essentially 1 case that controls. You are unable to find the answer and are looking to rely on this website. Just fyi, policy limits are $25,000 minimum now, not $15,000.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 9:29 am
Reply to  Anonymous

There are quite a few cases that control on the questions under NRS 18.015. But otherwise I concur that its a relatively easy process that one does not want to screw up.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 7:51 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I find this comment distasteful for a couple of reasons. First, the aggressive way it needlessly seeks to embarrass 2:27 PM discourages others from asking substantive legal questions on this blog, which is one of its most useful purposes. Second, this scenario is common and, based on CLE’s I’ve attended over the years, not as straightforward as 9:11 PM suggests. I’ve enforced around three attorney liens in my career, but never against a client who left. I am genuinely interested in the answer. As to the three liens I did enforce, I do remember spending a lot of time double checking my work, service and procedure to make sure it was correct. I was successful all three times. Third, 9:11 PM has violated the admonition of the 16th President of the United States: “Be excellent to each other.”

Last edited 1 day ago by Anonymous
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 7:54 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I support 7:51. I don’t like the references to Google. One can always Google. We come here to ask substantive questions not only to get that answer but for things Google can’t provide like how it might function with current judges, trends, to build camaraderie, many reasons, etc.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 9:24 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Uhh, Bill and Ted, Wild Stalions – “Be excellent to each other”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 7, 2026 10:42 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Rufus approves.