- Quickdraw McLaw
- 23 Comments
- 134 Views
Today we’re looking at the races in District Court Departments 5 and 8. In Department 5 we have Judge Carolyn Ellsworth running against William C. Horne. [edjudicateclarkcounty.com; Vote411]
In Department 8 we have newsmaker Judge Doug Smith running for reelection against Christine Guerci-Nyhus. [edjudicateclarkcounty.com; Vote411]
Please give us some insight on who should be elected in a little over a month.
Who should be elected in District Court Department 5?
Who should be elected in District Court Department 8?
My money is on Doug Smith. He has a strong following in the criminal defense bar and the law enforcement community including the D.A.s.
Smith has a strong following with Tom Pitaro and maybe a half dozen other people in the criminal defense bar. Most of us know that he treats our clients, and us, like crap and his legal rulings are a joke. Most of the criminal defense attorneys I know are appalled that he's a judge. We worry about Pitaro's influence over the union vote. Love Tom, but hate his dedication to this horrible judge.
Doug Smith is well liked and respected by many criminal defense attorneys. Like any judge, he has his detractors. He is decisive perhaps too much so. You know where you stand with him. He does not flip flop. He does not put up with nonsense from the defendants nor defense counsel. He is not afraid to rule against the State. I am sticking with what I know.
In Dept. 5, Ellsworth is a horrible judge with a miserable demeanor. She needs to go. Horne is not a great choice but an alternative. Remember when Ellsworth hammered the former Deputy DA over simple drug possession. The guy eventually committed suicide.
Please. His demons were far more personal and separate from any party in his drug case.
I want to give Attorney Christine Guerci credit for running against Doug Smith. She has my vote. Time for a change.
Ellsworth upholds the law. She makes difficult decisions according to the law. The Deputy DA knew the law, broke the law, and was assessed a legally appropriate penalty. It is not her fault that he did drugs, fled the country and had personal issues. We need judges who can uphold the law and not offer back room side deals to politically connected "friends of the court." Ellsworth should be retained.
Hear! Hear!
Ellsworth reading and responding to the posts. I am voting for Horne.
As retired Supreme Court Justice Bill Maupin said of Judge Ellsworth, "She is one of the most knowledgeable and able judges on the District Court bench." She should obviously be retained as the most qualified candidate. Whether or not you buy into the Schubert smoke screen, it should be obvious that Horne is not in the least qualified to be a judge–he hasn't even been practicing law for the minimum 10 years.
I am intelligent enough to formulate my own opinions, thank you.
How is Horne running if he doesn't have the minimum 10 years?
He'll have it two weeks before he takes the bench if he wins. So much for qualifications.
This is silly. Horne has the qualifications because he has been an active member of the bar for ten years. He served in the legislature for part or most of the ten years which is just a few months (3 months or 120 days) every other year. I believe he has also practiced. I remember when he had has own practice doing criminal cases. If he did not meet the qualifications, he would have been challenged by the incumbent Ellsworth. Smiley was challenged by Villani, for example and came off the ballot. The RJ Editorial skewed things.
Under that same analysis, then Linda Norvell Marquis is not qualified to run against Joe Scalia because she does not have ten years of Family Law practice. When the candidate declares, I think they are required to affirm or attest to things like their residency and qualifications. The lawyers who post on this blog is just getting dumb and dumber.
Doh!
I have a case against Jacob Haftner. He just filed a "Consent to e-service via wiznet" in the case. Jacob – e-service via wiznet was made mandatory in June. You should know this if you are running for judge.
The votes are so lopsided one way or the other. It makes one wonder whether the voting is being done by a candidates cronies or campaigns. It can't be right. I don't trust it. Who makes up the blog followers and those who post?
Take the polls for what they are worth. You can also tell when candidates, ahem, Ellsworth, Friedberg, and Hughes are posting. When you a get a regurge from their campaign website, you know it is from the candidate, or their flunkies.
I'm voting for Christine Guerci-Nyhus. Smith often times jumps to conclusions (sometimes erroneously) early in civil cases that leaves the attorneys for both sides scratching their heads. I don't know much about Guerci-Nyhus, but I know Smith is not the answer.
I am voting for Ellsworth because she is 1) intelligent; and 2) devotes the time necessary to make well reasoned decisions. Even if you disagree with her decisions, they are supported by the law (including the Schubert sentence). I'm voting to retain a good judge that appears to acutally want to be a judge, not an Assemblyman who now wants the title of Judge because he can't have the Assemblyman title anymore (he's termed out).
Permit me to take the contra on Christine Guerci-Nyhus. She may talk a good game at campaign events, but she absolutely doesn't have the temperament to be a fair and patient judge. She can be pretty vindictive and highly susceptible to the politics of a particular situation. People with "juice" will prevail in her court, whether it's an appropriate result or not. Time for a change from Doug Smith? Possibly, but don't say you weren't warned about Guerci-Nyhus.
Yes, agreed. Don't think she will have the kindest demeanor or be very nice should she make it.
Horne is a blow hard. Always has been and the last thing we need is another blow hard on the bench. He is a dyed in the wooler that would unlock the prisons if he could so I do not trust that he would be fair minded at all.