- Quickdraw McLaw
- 20 Comments
- 148 Views
Today we look at the infamous Family Court Department C bench, which up until yesterday was “occupied” by Steven Jones. As you may have noticed, yesterday Jones pleaded guilty to one felony count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in a $2.6 million investment scheme. (You can get the full story at the RJ.) Supposedly, Jones was going to officially resign from the bench by sending a letter to the Governor. There has been no word on whether the Governor will act to replace him at this time since there is an election in early November that Jones is not in since he already decided not to run for reelection.
It is nice that the Jones debacle (because it really has been a debacle) finally appears to be over, but it is troubling how long it took to get here. After he was indicted in October 2012, it was late November 2012 when the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline suspended Jones with pay (the with pay part was required by state law) until his criminal case was resolved. Meanwhile, a temporary judge was paid to fill in for some of his case load. Jones contested the Commission’s decision impeding the Commission’s ability to make a decision. Then, we had the joy of seeing this picture and learning of Jones’ relationship with (the late) Lisa Willardson, which after a hearing on the matter, Jones admitted remorse for making one mistake in his 25 years of service on the bench. As a consequence of that mistake, he got a slap on the wrist and did not collect his salary for three months while he was still suspended because of his federal indictment. Now, here we are almost two years later and Jones is finally stepping down from the bench. It’s cliche to say the system doesn’t work, but with this and the (late) Elizabeth Halverson debacle, it’s clear that the Nevada system for judicial discipline DOES NOT WORK. Here’s hoping that we learn from these mistakes and take steps to avoid these types of problems in the future.
That said, let’s take a look at two candidates seeking to replace Jones. Should voters choose Rebecca Burton or John Hall “Jack” Howard, Jr? More info is available at Vote411 or you can see what we said about these candidates in the primary earlier this year here.
Who should be elected in Family Court Department C?
Why not set up a system where a preliminary hearing is held to determine the likelihood that a judge is guilty, and then suspend pay, or at least reduce it significantly and hold the rest in escrow until a final determination is made. If the judge is found guilty, the pay is forfeited. If innocent, he'll get a big payout at the end and hugs from everyone.
I know this is an oversimplification, but at least we wouldn't have a lame-duck judge sitting around collecting a huge salary on the tax payers' dollar.
Voting for Rebecca. She is a great candidate. Very intelligent, and a great disposition.
Weak field here.
I am voting for Rebecca Burton because she is more than qualified. I also wholeheartedly agree with 9:22 AM's comment about holding the pay from suspended judges in escrow pending the outcome of their proceedings before the Judicial Commission. I believe this comports with due process and will result in huge savings to our taxpayers.
Yeah, the article mentions Jones will pay restitution (to those affected by his crime), but of course, there will be no restitution for the unearned salary he has drawn for the last 2 years.
With the income earned during the last two years, is Jones now fully vested in PERS? It seems inequitable for him to get a pension.
I wonder if he will buy out the five years he has left to get a full 30.
Random issue, but how does one get full auto insurance information for an adverse party? I have the adverse party's VIN and license plate number, and the DMV website only provides the last four digits of the policy number. Calling the insurance company and providing a VIN did not work. The DMV is giving me the runaround on the telephone. The whole purpose for auto insurance is to protect the injured; the systems in place are protecting those who do not comply, e.g., who do not carry insurance cards in their vehicles.
I believe there is an NRS statute where they have to provide insurance info on an auto accident, both civil and criminal? Did you try filing a claim? If party fails to coop, then you have an additional cause of action.
I believe the applicable statute is NRS 690B.042.
PERS is so underfunded, do you really think the money is there to keep paying judges and firemen 10 k a month in pension? And I am pro-union.
SFR1 Decision released by Nevada SUpreme Court on superpriority liens. Multimillionaires were created and confirmed today to the detriment of Nevada homeowners.
Please explain further….
Yes, please explain 11:52 AM. The outcome is better for Nevada homeowners if U.S. Bank's MTD is upheld on appeal and they get to foreclose on the house too? I'm failing to draw the connection to how that is having a direct effect on Nevada homeowners. Perhaps you are referencing that it's now explicitly legal for the HOA's superpriority lien foreclosure to proceed nonjudicially?
I am referring to investors paying $5000 to get title free and clear to homes by wiping out entire deeds of trust and leaving lenders with a sole recourse of pursuing homeowners. I am referring to the effect which this ruling is going to have on lending practices in the State of Nevada. If you do not think that this ruling (and really the manner in which the statute was drafted) will have an adverse effect on Nevada homeowners, you either are not thinking one step down the road or represent the investors who have received a huge windfall today.
I agree completely 2:07 PM
The foreclosure process, whether it is processed judicially or nonjudicially, requires giving notice to the others with an interest, including the bank. The bank knew that the HOA was going to foreclose if the arrears weren't paid off. Banks don't lend people money out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it to make money. It is literally an investment. Why can't the bank pay off the arrears, which are minimal in comparison to their profit on the loan, to protect their investment? The lender can then foreclose. Or perhaps, there lies the problem, that the banks may have to pay off HOA arrears to protect their investment, which makes it marginally more risky to lend here?
I understand that courts elsewhere have come also down on this issue like Nevada's SC. Have those places been affected in the manner that is the fear here?
Congratulations to them….does anyone know who owns SFR1?
Dayvid Figlet is a decent attorney, surprising.
Figler, apologies to Mr. Figler.