The Nevada Assembly voted on party lines to pass AB125 which will result in dramatic changes to Chapter 40 and the waistlines way of life of the construction defects bar. [8NewsNow]
The Assembly is also working on other meaningful changes to the law like expansions to the definition of justifiable homicide to cover those defending themselves in a carjacking situation. Really? [RJ]
To read the bills or for more on what the Legislature is up to, visit their website at http://www.leg.state.nv.us/
A look at what the State pays out in law suits. [Las Vegas Sun]
Federal prosecutors in the World Cup gambling ring case have an uphill battle. [RJ]
The City of Henderson says its employees can be fired for talking to reporters. [RJ]
You would think self defense would be easy to prove in a carjacking case under current law. Is this basically just adding to Nevada's castle doctrine, so that a person in a car, like a person in his own home, has a presumption of reasonable use of force against an intruder?
Guest
Anonymous
February 18, 2015 5:27 pm
Criminal penalties for "wrongly describing" a defect? WTF? That plus all the gun-nut stuff. This legislature is drunk out of its mind on the Tea Party Kool-Aid.
This section was added because during the process the subs want to depo homeowners and make the homeowners say that they knew that yellow brass was installed at all of their plumbing fixtures…that they knew that Aspen condenser coil units were installed into their HVAC units and have failed…thats where that rust stain on my stucco is coming from…that they knew that alarm contacts were installed at the sills of their windows and leaking into their walls…that they knew that GFCI wiring was done incorrectly…oh by the way this is no longer recoverable until your home actually suffers damage…which means by fire.
Guest
Anonymous
February 18, 2015 5:43 pm
Not a criminal penalty for wrongly describing a defect. Just a requirement that the homeowner swear that the defects described exist before launching the Chapter 40 process. Looks like one of the primary purposes of AB125 is to force the homeowners to be more involved in the process, which, granted, might be considered "burdensome" and "chilling." The current process is akin to a accident victim receiving a letter from an attorney telling them all the things that could be wrong after an accident (and including photographs of someone else's broken bones, crushed skulls, etc.), and inviting the plaintiff to join in the suit where all they have to do in most cases is have a few doctors glance at their chart, and if things really get desperate, testify for an hour or so.
I don't think anyone would deny that there were some abusers – Nancy Quon and Leon Benzer being the primary poster children. On the other hand, the builders threw together lots and lots of crap during the boom years. They then insisted on a "right to repair" which in reality became nothing more than right to delay and to complain about supposed technical defects in the notice. I can recall one or two cases where the builder actually made an effort. So it was a broken law in lots of ways that are too numerous to mention. The experts (on both sides) are the ones who laughed all the way to the bank.
The right to delay is spot on. Now they only have to delay you for 6 years…not 10. I understand reform needed to be made…but AB125 was written by SUBs…and there is nothing in this bill that now protects homeowners. The two biggest changes are the new sections 1 and 2…which basically requires a developer to indemnify the subs against any claims. How would you do your job if you knew no one was now watching you???
The "under penalty of perjury" was removed. But the fact still remains that this bill now makes the homeowners as their own inspectors…the section requires knowledge of both patent and latent conditions. So that stains down on your baseboard at your sliding glass door or french door…now the homeowner must know the exact reason for that stain to occur.
Pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. Why are all the CD hogs surprised? As to those merely concerned with justice, why are you surprised justice was sold out by the politicos up in Carson City? No one wants anything near justice. It's all about who profits on this electoral cycle. The slop will always be the same: tax payers.
Guest
Anonymous
February 18, 2015 6:35 pm
@9:43 well said. And many times there isn't even an accident to start with, just marketing hype from an ambulance chasing attorney
Guest
Anonymous
February 18, 2015 6:51 pm
Right. Most homeowners have memorized the building, plumbing, and electrical codes, so it should be no problem for them to swear under oath as to whether their home is code-compliant.
AB125 removes the bite of code violations…manufacture install requirements and a slew of other industry guidelines. AB125 also states that homeowners must identify patent and latent issues. So that big stain that is occurring at your kitchen ceiling since your crappy Wirsbo pipe connection just gave way…that homeowner is now on the hook for the repair. The insurance company will deny claim because they know its a construction defect. There's also the section that requires homeowners to go through the homeowners warranty carrier,,,which will get denied…which was probably sold to the homeowner by the builder…how does that make sense…2017 is right around the corner and the baggers stay will be a short one.
Guest
Anonymous
February 18, 2015 7:00 pm
Construction defect has made a lot of money for a lot of lawyers and ancillary people (experts, special masters, mediators, court reporters, claims adjusters, judges, etc.) for a very long time. Who would have imagined that it would last this long?
The rise of construction defect roughly coincided with the huge influx of lawyers from California and the emergence of the Boyd JD Factory of Maryland Parkway. Congratulations to those who saw the opportunity and took full advantage. But even the most naive among the people involved had to sense that the whole thing was just a BS money grab. All good things must come to an end. Many thanks to the geniuses who conceived of and implemented NRS Chapter 40; you've done well. It's time now to move on. No need to cry for the few low-level people who will be displaced by AB125.
Considering there wasn't an in state school before Boyd, where were attorneys coming from other than California? Most locals went to USD or Cal Western it seems like.
Boyd worked out alright for me, but any time I meet someone that is considering law school I tell them they need to go to a top 20 school or get a full scholarship that's guaranteed for the full term to a top 100 school. Otherwise it's a gamble, and could be no better than throwing 150k at a physical education degree.
I also went to Boyd and it worked out really well for me. But I went to Boyd when tuition was less than half of what it is now. I'm happy I went there and I'm now out on my own making about $200k per year. When people ask me if they should go to law school, I tell them to go to dental school instead. But if they are intent on going, I make sure to warn them about the risks they are taking.
If I could do it again, I'd either go somewhere that would give me a full scholarship, or do a part-time program and work at the same time so I don't have a load of student loan debt upon graduation.
I find it entertaining to talk about student loans with other attorneys. I mean, when you say that you went to Boyd for about $8000 / year (including books) and graduated with $59,000 in student loans (consolidated) at 2.5%, you get a ton of "fucking douchbag" looks at you. I'll be a super douche and throw in that my student loan payments started at $75, escalated to $150, and now are $300 / month.
Yikes, just for shits and giggles I plugged a $240,000 at 6.5% interest and got a monthly payment of $1,516.96 over 30 years. At least $110,000 at 6.5% interest over 30 years generated a more affordable payment of $695.27.
How does it work on a sliding scale? Is it a lot cheaper for the first few years, then you have to apply for a deferment so you don't have to pay it all back within 10 years? What are the payments like on the back end?
Income-based payment options. Doesn't matter how much you owe, only what you make. At the end of the repayment period, of course, you get screwed, because the rest is forgiven and you get to take it as income that year (unless you qualify for an exemption). Real life example (me): $100k in student loans. Making 75k as insurance defense monkey. Payment is about $140/month. Does that cover interest? Nope. If I made the same payments throughout the course of the loan (meaning, my life is truly shitty and I never earn more), will I owe MORE after paying for 20 years than I do today? Yep. But does that mean I can afford food while keeping current on my student loans, thus preventing Uncle Sam and his thugs from pillaging my bank account? Yes. Because Uncle Sam ALWAYS gets paid. Always.
It doesn't alarm anyone that AB125 was written by subcontractors…is being pushed through the legislature at record speed…it lowers the statute of repose from 10 to 6 years. Makes the developers indemnify the subs…basically the subs can build however they want with no recourse at all. I have seen the right to repair process…Billy Bob comes out with his caulk then walks. Its a joke…AB125 is so one sided its pathetic.
You would think self defense would be easy to prove in a carjacking case under current law. Is this basically just adding to Nevada's castle doctrine, so that a person in a car, like a person in his own home, has a presumption of reasonable use of force against an intruder?
Criminal penalties for "wrongly describing" a defect? WTF? That plus all the gun-nut stuff. This legislature is drunk out of its mind on the Tea Party Kool-Aid.
This section was added because during the process the subs want to depo homeowners and make the homeowners say that they knew that yellow brass was installed at all of their plumbing fixtures…that they knew that Aspen condenser coil units were installed into their HVAC units and have failed…thats where that rust stain on my stucco is coming from…that they knew that alarm contacts were installed at the sills of their windows and leaking into their walls…that they knew that GFCI wiring was done incorrectly…oh by the way this is no longer recoverable until your home actually suffers damage…which means by fire.
Not a criminal penalty for wrongly describing a defect. Just a requirement that the homeowner swear that the defects described exist before launching the Chapter 40 process. Looks like one of the primary purposes of AB125 is to force the homeowners to be more involved in the process, which, granted, might be considered "burdensome" and "chilling." The current process is akin to a accident victim receiving a letter from an attorney telling them all the things that could be wrong after an accident (and including photographs of someone else's broken bones, crushed skulls, etc.), and inviting the plaintiff to join in the suit where all they have to do in most cases is have a few doctors glance at their chart, and if things really get desperate, testify for an hour or so.
15-20 years ago, law firms would throw upscale barbeques for homeowners association members and sign up plaintiffs while serving ribs and beer.
I don't think anyone would deny that there were some abusers – Nancy Quon and Leon Benzer being the primary poster children. On the other hand, the builders threw together lots and lots of crap during the boom years. They then insisted on a "right to repair" which in reality became nothing more than right to delay and to complain about supposed technical defects in the notice. I can recall one or two cases where the builder actually made an effort. So it was a broken law in lots of ways that are too numerous to mention. The experts (on both sides) are the ones who laughed all the way to the bank.
The right to delay is spot on. Now they only have to delay you for 6 years…not 10. I understand reform needed to be made…but AB125 was written by SUBs…and there is nothing in this bill that now protects homeowners. The two biggest changes are the new sections 1 and 2…which basically requires a developer to indemnify the subs against any claims. How would you do your job if you knew no one was now watching you???
The "under penalty of perjury" was removed. But the fact still remains that this bill now makes the homeowners as their own inspectors…the section requires knowledge of both patent and latent conditions. So that stains down on your baseboard at your sliding glass door or french door…now the homeowner must know the exact reason for that stain to occur.
Pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. Why are all the CD hogs surprised? As to those merely concerned with justice, why are you surprised justice was sold out by the politicos up in Carson City? No one wants anything near justice. It's all about who profits on this electoral cycle. The slop will always be the same: tax payers.
@9:43 well said. And many times there isn't even an accident to start with, just marketing hype from an ambulance chasing attorney
Right. Most homeowners have memorized the building, plumbing, and electrical codes, so it should be no problem for them to swear under oath as to whether their home is code-compliant.
Oh please – if a problem is suspected, the homeowner can easily find someone to come inspect.
AB125 removes the bite of code violations…manufacture install requirements and a slew of other industry guidelines. AB125 also states that homeowners must identify patent and latent issues. So that big stain that is occurring at your kitchen ceiling since your crappy Wirsbo pipe connection just gave way…that homeowner is now on the hook for the repair. The insurance company will deny claim because they know its a construction defect. There's also the section that requires homeowners to go through the homeowners warranty carrier,,,which will get denied…which was probably sold to the homeowner by the builder…how does that make sense…2017 is right around the corner and the baggers stay will be a short one.
Construction defect has made a lot of money for a lot of lawyers and ancillary people (experts, special masters, mediators, court reporters, claims adjusters, judges, etc.) for a very long time. Who would have imagined that it would last this long?
The rise of construction defect roughly coincided with the huge influx of lawyers from California and the emergence of the Boyd JD Factory of Maryland Parkway. Congratulations to those who saw the opportunity and took full advantage. But even the most naive among the people involved had to sense that the whole thing was just a BS money grab. All good things must come to an end. Many thanks to the geniuses who conceived of and implemented NRS Chapter 40; you've done well. It's time now to move on. No need to cry for the few low-level people who will be displaced by AB125.
Considering there wasn't an in state school before Boyd, where were attorneys coming from other than California? Most locals went to USD or Cal Western it seems like.
A lot of local attorneys went to schools in Utah.
Utah and Arizona were popular.
And Thomas Cooley
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/unlv-provost-resign-return-teach-boyd-law-school
I think this is too bad. I like White. The comments to that article are pretty wild.
I think the suicidal JD comments on here frequently. LOL
Boyd worked out alright for me, but any time I meet someone that is considering law school I tell them they need to go to a top 20 school or get a full scholarship that's guaranteed for the full term to a top 100 school. Otherwise it's a gamble, and could be no better than throwing 150k at a physical education degree.
I agree with 9:57. Can you imagine $100k in student loan debt making $75k working 12 hour days as an insurance defense fungible billing unit?
I also went to Boyd and it worked out really well for me. But I went to Boyd when tuition was less than half of what it is now. I'm happy I went there and I'm now out on my own making about $200k per year. When people ask me if they should go to law school, I tell them to go to dental school instead. But if they are intent on going, I make sure to warn them about the risks they are taking.
If I could do it again, I'd either go somewhere that would give me a full scholarship, or do a part-time program and work at the same time so I don't have a load of student loan debt upon graduation.
I find it entertaining to talk about student loans with other attorneys. I mean, when you say that you went to Boyd for about $8000 / year (including books) and graduated with $59,000 in student loans (consolidated) at 2.5%, you get a ton of "fucking douchbag" looks at you. I'll be a super douche and throw in that my student loan payments started at $75, escalated to $150, and now are $300 / month.
Yikes, just for shits and giggles I plugged a $240,000 at 6.5% interest and got a monthly payment of $1,516.96 over 30 years. At least $110,000 at 6.5% interest over 30 years generated a more affordable payment of $695.27.
How does it work on a sliding scale? Is it a lot cheaper for the first few years, then you have to apply for a deferment so you don't have to pay it all back within 10 years? What are the payments like on the back end?
Income-based payment options. Doesn't matter how much you owe, only what you make. At the end of the repayment period, of course, you get screwed, because the rest is forgiven and you get to take it as income that year (unless you qualify for an exemption). Real life example (me): $100k in student loans. Making 75k as insurance defense monkey. Payment is about $140/month. Does that cover interest? Nope. If I made the same payments throughout the course of the loan (meaning, my life is truly shitty and I never earn more), will I owe MORE after paying for 20 years than I do today? Yep. But does that mean I can afford food while keeping current on my student loans, thus preventing Uncle Sam and his thugs from pillaging my bank account? Yes. Because Uncle Sam ALWAYS gets paid. Always.
Not on today's topic list, but this blog frequently has discussions of the relative merits and drawbacks of the manner in which we, here in Nevada, elect judges. If this is a subject which interests you, read here: http://iaals.du.edu/library/publications/the-oconnor-judicial-selection-plan-how-it-works-why-it-matters
It doesn't alarm anyone that AB125 was written by subcontractors…is being pushed through the legislature at record speed…it lowers the statute of repose from 10 to 6 years. Makes the developers indemnify the subs…basically the subs can build however they want with no recourse at all. I have seen the right to repair process…Billy Bob comes out with his caulk then walks. Its a joke…AB125 is so one sided its pathetic.
Alarmed?
Sure.
But there's nothing that can be done at this point.