Environmental group sues over Gov. Lombardo’s appointment of ex-lawmaker James Settlemeyer to lead agency. [TNI; Nevada Current]
AG Aaron Ford questions whether remote work, regulation mandates apply to his office. [TNI]
Here are the results from Metro’s latest DUI blitz. [RJ]
Applications for the re-opened vacancy in Family Court Department C are due by March 10. [NV Courts]
A proposed Arizona law would bar the Arizona Bar and Supreme Court from “infringing” or “impeding” the political speech of attorneys or attorney’s clients by discipling them or revoking their license. [AZ Mirror]
I was telling a friend that federal judges have zero tolerance for nonsense. Les fucked around and found out.
Guest
Anonymous
February 15, 2023 7:06 pm
Question for my pals on this blog… I have a case where opposing counsel is not experienced in the relevant area of law. OC has admitted that this is not OC's area of practice. The dispute is not really about the law or the facts of Plaintiff's case, but rather about some corollary issues that limit the amount of money that is available no matter what Plaintiff does. OC knows about those issues, but OC has a fundamental misunderstanding of how they affect this case. I've tried to explain that Plaintiff is wasting time and money by doing certain things, but OC has decided that Plaintiff can somehow multiply the value of the case when it simply is impossible under the circumstances. Now Plaintiff is going to waste a bunch of money, and also cost my client a bunch of money, because of OC's actions. To be clear, OC is not legally wrong, just wrong as a matter of practical effect.
@11:06 – Suggest a half-day mediation before engaging in too much discovery. Get a neutral to tell him he's incompetent and his expectations are unreasonable. Alternatively, if the issue arises under a contract or a statute file a motion for declaratory relief and have the court tell OC they are up in the night.
If your client is seeking any early resolution, time the expiration of the OOJ two days after the Dec relief hearing. Make sure to send a Beattie letter with the OOJ, which will be similar to your Dec relief motion, but may include additional arguments.
11:34-very sound advice, but the neutral, although presumably willing to tell OC about realistic expectations, the value of a case, and cost efficiency considerations, presumably is sufficiently diplomatic and will not condemn OC as being "incompetent."(even if he is).
Matters don't tend to settle when people are called idiots or morons.
But the broader concern I have with the problem you lay out, is that it is not limited to newer and less skilled attorneys. It is in fact a fairly widespread problem. There are many attorneys, even somewhat successful ones of decent reputation, who from time-to-time seem to advance a case that has little chance of being successful, or if successful is still likely a net loss for their client considering the final amount the client recovers vs. the attorney fees they expended..
Sometimes the attorney can't see it straight because their own extreme confidence and ego gets in the way, or sometimes they do see it but are primarily focused on the fact they will be well compensated by the client, even if the client does not turn out well in the end.
Guest
Anonymous
February 15, 2023 7:35 pm
Why was my post eliminated? I was obvious being sarcastic about the discussion yesterday. If that discussion was allowable how could a parody of that be offensive. Please Dr Dawg do not be so sensitive 😀
Sara J. King
Top rated business & corporate attorney in Newport Beach, California
Sara J. KingKing Reuben, P.C.
Practice Areas: Business & corporate, Real estate
Licensed in California since: 2014
Education: Loyola Law School Los Angeles
Selected to Rising Stars: 2019 – 2023
Guest
Anonymous
February 15, 2023 10:16 pm
Aaron Ford's position is not only wrong — but it is entirely nonsensical. Some would argue that, as the head of the state's executive branch, Gov. Lombardo's executive orders can/should **only** control the other executive offices. Also, I seem to recall that Ford did not see a problem with enforceability of Sisolak governing by executive orders…
I'm not necessarily on the same page as 2:16, but it is a very short(two sentence) post on a matter of some real import with likely political and/or legal implications. If 3:50 responds to this by saying "yawn", perhaps we should only post on simple, frivolous matters for those with zero patience for any analysis, and no concern for the actions of government, no matter how profoundly some of those actions may affect our lives.
That said, there is a problem with the post of 2:16, and that is that 2:16 seems to judge these matters through the lens of their party affiliation. But I guess the majority of people do, and it does not often happen that someone posts something highly critical of those in their same political party as them, nor do they tend to praise the actions of those in the opposing political party. But that would be quite refreshing to see once in a while.
But we never hear it. Those I know who supported Trump never say anything positive about the actions of Biden or any other democrat. And those who supported Biden never praise anything by Trump or any republicans.
That's just the hyper polarized political landscape we live in. But now we can all say "yawn" as I went on far too long trying to make my point, but thanks much for reading if you did.
Who is the recommendation for a landlord/tenant law attorney? I have a client wanting to serve a notice to enter and inspect a property, and I've never done anything like that. Who should I call on this?
A landlord?
If so, they just have to provide 24 hours Notice to Inspect. Post on the premises, document via email and phone messages, etc. You will be fine.
Since my comment was removed, I will restate it in a nicer way. I would not use Andrew Bao. He is not great. Terry Moore at Marquis & Aurbach is the go-to for residential LL/T. Ed Kania does alot of LL but is not as fabulous. Aaron Dean does some also. Then you have the firms that do it as a mill (Clark & Walker for example).
If the T is not present when the LL shows up for the duly noticed inspection, your LL needs to worry about potentially hostile dogs if he enters pursuant to his 24 hr notice.
The LL should bring an "independent" witness with him, in case the T later claims that personal property disappeared during the inspection. I would video the inspection from start to finish, as further evidence that there was no theft by the LL.
@403 Good advice. Although, in a standard GLVAR lease agreement, it is the obligation of the T to have the premises ready for inspection.
Guest
Anonymous
February 15, 2023 11:13 pm
Andrew Bao is great.
Guest
Anonymous
February 16, 2023 12:05 am
Telles’s wife to sell house to finance an all hands on deck defense. You heard it here first. He’s calling the DA’s bluff and will will go to trial.
Telles's wife will follow the path of Matt Beasley's wife and realize that there is no hope and she needs to save herself. There are no defenses. There are no hands that want to be on this deck.
My guess is the straight flush would be that Rob hires someone to confess to killing German and planting the evidence to frame Rob. That would be the proper move at this point IMO.
Re Metro DUI stops: 324 stops, and only 68 citations. That means that 256 motorists who were lawfully driving got stopped. To me, this suggests that the stops were for the most part without probable cause.
That's quite the leap to make there was no probable cause. What if the driver, for example, was driving without his lights on. I've done that on accident. What if he was speeding, something many impaired drivers do and unimpaired alike. Do you have a point? Or is your comment a veiled attempt to bash the police?
You don't need probable cause to initiate a traffic stop. You only need reasonable suspicion to initiate an investigatory stop. And idiots not paying attention or using their cell phones, while not intoxicated, drive in a manner that provides reasonable suspicion for a stop but may not ultimately result in a DUI citation.
4:05 PM-No probable cause for DUI stops. Need to go back to law school or review criminal procedure case law. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of police sobriety checkpoints. The Court held 6-3 that these checkpoints met the Fourth Amendment standard of "reasonable search and seizure."
9:42 – you're half right. While there might not need to be PC for checkpoints, the DUI blitz didn't involve checkpoints. Metro said "We’re out looking for violations, rather than waiting for someone to come through our checkpoint to see if they’re impaired. Inevitably, we find other crimes are being committed, that we enforce at that point, even if it’s not a DUI, or related to a DUI." So 324 stops, ostensibly with RAS, and yet only 21% of those resulted in some kind of enforcement action? I mean, is Metro's RAS any different from randomly picking cars at this point?
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they were pulling people over for minor infractions looking for DUIs and once they found out the driver was sober, they gave the driver a break. The other citations were probably for infractions that were too egregious to look past.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11754733/Cristiano-Ronaldo-wins-334-637-rape-accusers-lawyer-acted-bad-faith.html
I was telling a friend that federal judges have zero tolerance for nonsense. Les fucked around and found out.
Question for my pals on this blog… I have a case where opposing counsel is not experienced in the relevant area of law. OC has admitted that this is not OC's area of practice. The dispute is not really about the law or the facts of Plaintiff's case, but rather about some corollary issues that limit the amount of money that is available no matter what Plaintiff does. OC knows about those issues, but OC has a fundamental misunderstanding of how they affect this case. I've tried to explain that Plaintiff is wasting time and money by doing certain things, but OC has decided that Plaintiff can somehow multiply the value of the case when it simply is impossible under the circumstances. Now Plaintiff is going to waste a bunch of money, and also cost my client a bunch of money, because of OC's actions. To be clear, OC is not legally wrong, just wrong as a matter of practical effect.
Is there anything I can/should do?
@11:06 – Suggest a half-day mediation before engaging in too much discovery. Get a neutral to tell him he's incompetent and his expectations are unreasonable. Alternatively, if the issue arises under a contract or a statute file a motion for declaratory relief and have the court tell OC they are up in the night.
OOJ early and often.
If your client is seeking any early resolution, time the expiration of the OOJ two days after the Dec relief hearing. Make sure to send a Beattie letter with the OOJ, which will be similar to your Dec relief motion, but may include additional arguments.
11:34-very sound advice, but the neutral, although presumably willing to tell OC about realistic expectations, the value of a case, and cost efficiency considerations, presumably is sufficiently diplomatic and will not condemn OC as being "incompetent."(even if he is).
Matters don't tend to settle when people are called idiots or morons.
But the broader concern I have with the problem you lay out, is that it is not limited to newer and less skilled attorneys. It is in fact a fairly widespread problem. There are many attorneys, even somewhat successful ones of decent reputation, who from time-to-time seem to advance a case that has little chance of being successful, or if successful is still likely a net loss for their client considering the final amount the client recovers vs. the attorney fees they expended..
Sometimes the attorney can't see it straight because their own extreme confidence and ego gets in the way, or sometimes they do see it but are primarily focused on the fact they will be well compensated by the client, even if the client does not turn out well in the end.
Why was my post eliminated? I was obvious being sarcastic about the discussion yesterday. If that discussion was allowable how could a parody of that be offensive. Please Dr Dawg do not be so sensitive 😀
https://www.fox5vegas.com/2023/02/15/lawsuit-lawyer-misspent-10m-clients-money-partying-las-vegas-strip-resort/
Would make even Nelson Cohen blush
What state is she licensed in? I did a search for Nevada and California and nothing came up with her name on it?
Sara J. King
Top rated business & corporate attorney in Newport Beach, California
Sara J. KingKing Reuben, P.C.
Practice Areas: Business & corporate, Real estate
Licensed in California since: 2014
Education: Loyola Law School Los Angeles
Selected to Rising Stars: 2019 – 2023
Aaron Ford's position is not only wrong — but it is entirely nonsensical. Some would argue that, as the head of the state's executive branch, Gov. Lombardo's executive orders can/should **only** control the other executive offices. Also, I seem to recall that Ford did not see a problem with enforceability of Sisolak governing by executive orders…
yawn
I'm not necessarily on the same page as 2:16, but it is a very short(two sentence) post on a matter of some real import with likely political and/or legal implications. If 3:50 responds to this by saying "yawn", perhaps we should only post on simple, frivolous matters for those with zero patience for any analysis, and no concern for the actions of government, no matter how profoundly some of those actions may affect our lives.
That said, there is a problem with the post of 2:16, and that is that 2:16 seems to judge these matters through the lens of their party affiliation. But I guess the majority of people do, and it does not often happen that someone posts something highly critical of those in their same political party as them, nor do they tend to praise the actions of those in the opposing political party. But that would be quite refreshing to see once in a while.
But we never hear it. Those I know who supported Trump never say anything positive about the actions of Biden or any other democrat. And those who supported Biden never praise anything by Trump or any republicans.
That's just the hyper polarized political landscape we live in. But now we can all say "yawn" as I went on far too long trying to make my point, but thanks much for reading if you did.
Hence my "yawn".
Who is the recommendation for a landlord/tenant law attorney? I have a client wanting to serve a notice to enter and inspect a property, and I've never done anything like that. Who should I call on this?
A landlord?
If so, they just have to provide 24 hours Notice to Inspect. Post on the premises, document via email and phone messages, etc. You will be fine.
Andrew Bao
I had a case against Andrew recently (LL/T) and I'd recommend him too
Since my comment was removed, I will restate it in a nicer way. I would not use Andrew Bao. He is not great. Terry Moore at Marquis & Aurbach is the go-to for residential LL/T. Ed Kania does alot of LL but is not as fabulous. Aaron Dean does some also. Then you have the firms that do it as a mill (Clark & Walker for example).
If the T is not present when the LL shows up for the duly noticed inspection, your LL needs to worry about potentially hostile dogs if he enters pursuant to his 24 hr notice.
The LL should bring an "independent" witness with him, in case the T later claims that personal property disappeared during the inspection. I would video the inspection from start to finish, as further evidence that there was no theft by the LL.
@403 Good advice. Although, in a standard GLVAR lease agreement, it is the obligation of the T to have the premises ready for inspection.
Andrew Bao is great.
Telles’s wife to sell house to finance an all hands on deck defense. You heard it here first. He’s calling the DA’s bluff and will will go to trial.
Telles's wife will follow the path of Matt Beasley's wife and realize that there is no hope and she needs to save herself. There are no defenses. There are no hands that want to be on this deck.
The DA holds quad aces. Does Rob think he is going to draw to a straight flush?
My guess is the straight flush would be that Rob hires someone to confess to killing German and planting the evidence to frame Rob. That would be the proper move at this point IMO.
He needs a Jimmy In 'n out. Better Call Saul, Rob.
The DA's bluff? Huh?
You sure? The house isn't listed for sale.
Re Metro DUI stops: 324 stops, and only 68 citations. That means that 256 motorists who were lawfully driving got stopped. To me, this suggests that the stops were for the most part without probable cause.
That's quite the leap to make there was no probable cause. What if the driver, for example, was driving without his lights on. I've done that on accident. What if he was speeding, something many impaired drivers do and unimpaired alike. Do you have a point? Or is your comment a veiled attempt to bash the police?
You don't need probable cause to initiate a traffic stop. You only need reasonable suspicion to initiate an investigatory stop. And idiots not paying attention or using their cell phones, while not intoxicated, drive in a manner that provides reasonable suspicion for a stop but may not ultimately result in a DUI citation.
4:05 PM-No probable cause for DUI stops. Need to go back to law school or review criminal procedure case law. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of police sobriety checkpoints. The Court held 6-3 that these checkpoints met the Fourth Amendment standard of "reasonable search and seizure."
9:42 – you're half right. While there might not need to be PC for checkpoints, the DUI blitz didn't involve checkpoints. Metro said "We’re out looking for violations, rather than waiting for someone to come through our checkpoint to see if they’re impaired. Inevitably, we find other crimes are being committed, that we enforce at that point, even if it’s not a DUI, or related to a DUI." So 324 stops, ostensibly with RAS, and yet only 21% of those resulted in some kind of enforcement action? I mean, is Metro's RAS any different from randomly picking cars at this point?
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they were pulling people over for minor infractions looking for DUIs and once they found out the driver was sober, they gave the driver a break. The other citations were probably for infractions that were too egregious to look past.