- Quickdraw McLaw
- 60 Comments
- 188 Views
- Estate planning has picked up during this pandemic. [RJ]
- Here’s the RJ’s debate for Department 15. [RJ]
- Former Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Conrad Hafen is now a city attorney in Saratoga Springs, Utah. [KSL]
- The Local Rules for the District of Nevada were amended last week.
- Commentary: Dear America, please don’t hold her against us. [Nevada Current]
I think Mayor Goodman is right.
Says who, Goodman or a law firm?
NO!! We have to cower in fear and stay at home for the next 12-24 months! We have to wait for a vaccine that may never come. If it doesn't, well then everyone will have to work at home from now on (those very few thousand people that will still have a job), wearing masks and a complete hazmat Level 3 suit, with a face shield in public (that is the places the government will tell you specifically you can still go to). No more school for kids – everyone will be homeschooled from now on (consequently all teachers are fired and move out of state). No more strip, no more casinos (consequently no more tax dollars, no more service industry). Population of Vegas drops down to 200-300k people by the middle of next year. Consequently – no more need for at least 70% of the lawyers if not more. Sounds like a utopian paradise to me. Or, conversely, we have to accept the fact that COVID, among car accidents Flu, heart disease and cancer will claim some lives – and that we cannot shut down the economy that effects hundreds of millions over the potential death of a thousands…. I don't care to argue about this either way, since our opinions clearly do not make any difference to anyone is the so called "government" in charge of the state.
The wussification of America is now complete.
During WWII, in order to protect freedom, we sacrificed young, healthy, productive lives.
Now, we sacrifice freedom to protect the old, infirm, and unproductive.
Yes,people are expendable. My firm believes that. I work for a bank defense firm.
Absolutely. The virus will not be eradicated. Opening, whenever it happens, will result in more becoming people sick. AC was arrogant, and rudely interrupting, spinning and twisting Goodman's words. Someone born with a silver spoon, who has never worried about making rent, having a car repo'd or feeding the kids. Our economy depends on our service workers who are facing these issues right now.
That's nice. I thought she did a great job looking like a moron all on her own.
Mayor Goodman is right that we need to start to open things up. We are learning social distance, masks and hand-washing. We understand that people with underlying conditions need greater precautions. We get it. Everything does not have to be closed. I don't golf but golf courses should be open. Parks should be open. There are many things we should be allowed to do. Once size fits all is not the solution.
Mayor is also concerned that city services are going to disappear soon. There are already brownouts with some of our first responders. Furloughs are on the horizon. So, I don't blame her or fault her. Anderson Cooper is a POS. CNN is not news. (FOX is not news either).
Governor Sisoslack is one of the sheep. He’s enamored with media. He’s enamored with his office. He wants to fit in with the other governors. When another governor makes a move that the media likes, he's going to copy it. He's screwed all of the cow counties with his one size fits all quarantine. He doesn't know how or what to plan. He will be lost or probably long gone when the stadium bonds default. He doesn't know if he's coming or going. Good job picking this clown. Chris G would have been much better.
Think about these annual stats:
Car deaths: 38,000+
Overdose: 70,000+
Alcohol: 88,000 (some overlap here with cars)
Guns: 38,000+
Cigarette smoking: 480,000+
2nd hand smoke: 40,000+
Flu 12,000 – 61,000
Abortions 600,000+
It’s time to start to re-open.
Car deaths: not contagious
Drug overdose: not contagious
Alcohol: not contagious
Guns: not contagious
Cigarette smoking: not contagious
Second-hand smoke: not contagious
Flu: contagious, but not nearly as contagious or as deadly as COVID-19
Abortions: not contagious
hmmmm at least one of these things doesn't belong…
We've all seen different versions of this meme. I'm Pro-Life, but I find the abortion fanatics to be a quite insufferable and loathsome bunch. Some of these memes say its 100,000 abortions a year, this one is 600,000. I saw one the other day that said 1M. Sometimes I get the feeling that the abortion fanatics just make stats up.
Car deaths: preventable
Drug overdose: preventable / treatable
Alcohol: preventable / treatable
Guns: not contagious
Cigarette smoking: preventable
Second-hand smoke: preventable
Flu: preventable if everyone stays home and we close the economy
Abortions: not contagious
The "Sisoslack" almost snuck past. Agree he's a disappointment.
Before we either praise or condemn politicians for being right or wrong on issues such as the pandemic, if we really knew how these things operate, we would not be commenting on the politicians, but instead whether we agree or disagree with the politicians advisers and consultants. Even when a politician seem real independent to the public, and seems like someone decisive and bold and who often makes their own decisions, most people would truly be disturbed to learn that 99.5% of all decisions made by politicians are made by advisers and consultants. Now, that being said, politicians surround themselves with people who have similar political philosophies.
I know you all know that politicians rely heavily on their team, but form my perspective of having worked on political staffs, and directly for public officials, it is really an eye-opening how pervasive and all engulfing this concept is.
And it's true no matter who we are discussing–whether it be a supposedly transformative candidate like Obama, or a shoot-from-the-hip rugged individualist like Trump. Everything that comes from their mouth, policy was, is laboriously decided and scripted by others.
People may not believe that about Trump, as he impulsively twitters when he wants to insult people, etc. But make no mistake that when it comes to this pandemic, every thing he utters is decided and written by others.
That said I believe that the basic philosophy he has elucidated in general terms–that we need to re-open as soon as practical–has been his settled view since the inception. But all the details which puts bones on the policy skeleton is placed there by others.
And the same goes for all these governors who are providing pandemic policies.
So when voting for someone, it pays to know more about their team, but we seldom focus on that.
I've only gotten one email seeking my vote tomorrow.
2:36–on that issue, concerning political leadership and policy during the pandemic, in my view no matter what positon people take on how aggressive, vs. how careful and tentative, we should be about re-opening, there seems to be some degree on consensus, from both sides of the aisle, that California is painting itself into a real corner.
Even though Cal, with 40 million people to New York's 20 million people, has only one-tenth of the corona cases as New York, the Governor's six point plan in Cal.(before re-opening can truly occur) is real concerning.
I actually lean a little more to the liberal, be real circumspect about re-opening until the health crisis becomes more controlled(don't hate me for it), rather than the more aggressive re-opening approach which tends to sound the clarion call of economic devastation if this persists(which, admittedly, has some real validity if this grinds on too much longer).
But, even though I lean more toward the don't re-open yet camp, Cal. has set itself up for failure and utter disaster.
Just review California's six point plan, and all the sub-parts. It is laughably ludicrous not to re-open till all those conditions, and all those sub-parts are met. Why? Because they can't all possibly be met, on a realistic basis, at least not within the next six months(or even a year).
Don't believe me? Just read them. And I don't mean a synopsis either from conservative FOX or more liberally leaning CNN. Forget what the pundits of either of those networks say and think. Read the six point plan yourself and you will winch.
So, as to the point of 2:36, who the Hell is advising their governor?
2:49, California never learns. Just look at the last two or three decades.
California never learned that uncontrolled growth does not pay for itself, and also never learned how to control and regulate utility companies effectively, thus leading to crisis.And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
And none of the governors ever learned form these errors–not Gray Davis, not Arnold, nor Brown, and not Newsome.
The approach to problems was to expand and magnify them, and throw more pointless money at the problems, rather than control and shrink the problems. And even though I am a democrat and usually vote for democratic candidates, I believe Cal. is best served, at this time in its history, by a truly intelligent conservative who has a real sense of economics and governmental regulations, and has a team equal to the task.
But that's not what they currently have. Their current governor certainly has skills and knowledge in some areas, but I'm not certain he is an ideal match for Cal. with its current multitude of complex, multi-layered economic and regulatory issues which have been brewing for decades.
I'm in favor of using metrics/benchmarks for phases to reopen the economy, not arbitrary dates picked by halfwit politicians. And to that end, thank you Mayor Goodman for so quickly and easily discrediting the rush to reopen everything. You've done your nation and city a great service, even if it wasn't intended. Now, whenever anyone talks about just opening things up, they will think of his glorious Billy Madison moment you had in front of the entire nation.
WOW… the Goodman Cooper Interaction would make a GREAT SNL sketch!
As far as the Dept. 15 debate, a few observations:
1. The moderator may have been a little harsh in classifying Judge Hardy's 77% retention score as justifying a grade of no more than a "C."
I think the average score on the survey was 71%.
2. Teagan Machnich was correct, IMO, that the judge was appointed largely on account of political connections. But that goes more to the integrity and priorities of the process of how we appoint these judges in the first place.
Ms.Machnich, in my view, should focus on his performance on the bench if that justifies removal. Ms.Machnich should also recognize that attorneys in general, as well as the media and the public, generally are not interested in removing incumbent judges who are kind of average simply because some challenger who wants the job says we deserve better than mediocrity. Sounds good, but not realistic. When focusing on the performance of an incumbent judge, it is only an effective approach if the judges performance is really bad.
3. Mr. Breeden did focus somewhat on performance, but the statistic he offered may be somewhat misleading. I doubt that 40% of this judge's appealed case were totally overturned. He has only been on the bench a fairly brief period. So, it may be something like there were only 5 appeals from his department, and two of them were remanded as to certain issues, with other issues being affirmed.
Dept 15 likes to scold lawyers and litigants. Lawyers don't forget.
I like Joe Hardy personally but not as a judge. He gets tossed in my vote.
There is a reason they removed his business court docket from him. He was not competent in those matters. I don't know if either challenger would be better though. Anyone have any experience with them?
Mr. Breeden failed to address his statistics, he has a legal malpractice case filed against him currently.
So?
So some disgruntled client filed a legal malpractice case (twice apparently) against him? What is the nature of the allegations? Are they true? I went and looked at the Complaint(s) on Attorney Corner and it appears to be a sour grapes client from that Mandalay Bay sign case. Clients did not accept a settlement offer and want to blame the attorney. Sorry but not sorry.
If you're going to run for judge, you can't nitpick the sitting judge's record while being dismissive of your own. Sounds like Teagen is in fact the most reasonable of the bunch.
1:00 p.m is right, with the implications of their one word, two letter post of "So?"
Just like it might be misleading in-and-of itself to merely refer to a 40% reversal rate of a judge, it is probably even more misleading to impugn an attorney's competence and reputation by asserting, without elaboration, that he or she has a malpractice suit filed against them.
For example, since no elaboration is offered, how do we know it is not some frivolous suit filed by a disgruntled former client on a pro per basis, as it was too useless and meritless for any attorney to accept?
And even if it was filed by an attorney, how do we know it is of arguable merit until it results in a substantive settlement or verdict.
I am no taking up for Breeden. I know nothing about him or his skill level. I just don't think it's fair to attack an attorney based on a barebones allegation that someone sued them and/or filed a Bar Complaint against them. Details and final results are what may matter, not just the fact that someone was disenchanted with the representation an attorney provided.
Watch this video on Breeden – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hEt1haf8pM
Enough said!
So Veterans in Politics endorses Breeden. The anti-ViPs (Nevada Court Watchers) then attack Breeden through through Anti-Sanson attorney Jennifer Abrams and accuse Breeden of everything that Sanson has been accused of because he was endorsed by ViP. Is that what every race is going to turn into: Sanson and DiCiero going after each other in case after case?
His arguments and logic are the issue – not the political back and forth with the two groups.
"Is that what every race is going to turn into: Sanson and DiCiero going after each other in case after case?"
UGH. I wish Jon Ralston's judicial races project was more competent. It seems like every person who wades into the "review" process of judicial races just adds to the clown show.
I asked around about Tegan in the criminal arena. The politest thing I heard was that she is crazy. We have enough crazy on the bench. We don't need another one.
3:13 I’m curious who you spoke with. I have a pretty good relationship with both sides of the criminal bar. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but this is pretty general and untrue (but, of course, I’m biased)
Don't waste any time worrying about it. It was probably the venting of a couple disgruntled prosecutors, if it happened at all.
Tegan– I am not voting for you but will also say that you (and Adam Breeden) really should not go down the rabbit hole of trying to quash or worry about every negative opinion of you. Every attorney in this town and on this Blog is thought to be crazy, crooked, lazy or stupid (sometimes more than one of these at a time). As someone who has been personally crucified on this Blog, please believe me when I opine that it is not worth it. Be your best self and candidate and let the rest sort itself out.
Veterans in Politics also endorsed Yvette Chevalier Lopez who is certifiable.
I agree with a lot of what 12:00 says. I also agree with 12;03 that how attorneys are treated is vital. Generally speaking, attorneys would much prefer to appear before an average performing judge who treats them well, rather than a somewhat more knowledgeable and more competent judge who degrades and humiliates the attorneys.
And when attorneys practice in areas of law where their clients are often present at these hearings(Family Law, Criminal Law, etc.) any ill-treatment of attorneys is greatly magnified as to effect as the client has just seen their attorney barbecued by an arrogant, ill-tempered jurist.
I had the same reaction as 12:00 concerning Mr. Breeden's representation that the judge has a 40% reversal rate.
Obviously, such a reversal rate sounds concerning(and even disturbing) on the surface, but the representation raises more questions than it answers.
It seems unlikely that 40% of the time that his decisions are appealed, that they are completely revered as to all major issues. Yet that is what I believe we are intended to conclude when informed simply that he has a 40% reversal rate. I think there is a lot of nuance to reversal rates, such as how many issues were in fact reversed and remanded, as opposed to how many were affirmed.
40% of Hardy's cases that are appealed are reversed and remanded for mistakes. It is concerning and disturbing.
It is actually a 38% reversal rate over 100+ cases.
https://www.ournevadajudges.com/judges/joseph-paul-hardy-jr/cases
1:02 again. If it is truly over 100 cases, and it is nearly a 40%reversal and remand rate, I concede that such is both concerning and disturbing, even if on some of those cases he is affirmed as to some issues.
I think you all should look at every judges’ reversal rate. Many are significantly higher. Furthermore, it appears that most business court judges, I.e the courts making more difficult decisions, or speciality courts have particularly higher reversal rates.
This link doesn't seem accurate at all
Also consider that Hardy has a part criminal docket. Most criminal appeals are desperate and based on technical issues. It should be easy for a judge to be affirmed on those appeals, yet he still has such a high error rate.
I don't want to weigh in on the debate (the medical professionals and the scientists have their opinions and the Covidiots have theirs), but I did just receive an email from an attorney in Germany that ended with: "P.S. Good luck with being a member of the control group." I'm a glass is half-full kinda guy, so I choose to believe the world is laughing with (not at) us.
Steve Sisolack is on Wolf Blitzer – CNN tonight. He's going to explain how 4,208 confirmed cases and 187 deaths justifies total shut-down and multi-generational economic calamity that he started. Put the pop-corn in the microwave.
Do you believe that *only* 187 of your fellow citizens would be dead right now had there been no shut-down? Show your work.
To both if you, you're both wrong. As someone correctly pointed out yesterday, SAH was never meant to prevent deaths. Its purpose was to not overwhelm the hospitals by spreading those who get sick out over a longer period of time. The critical question is, can Sisolak justify keeping Las Vegas shut down when our hospitals are not overwhelmed.
And why do you think we were trying to avoid overwhelming the hospitals? Most of the big epidemiological models were projecting something like .6-1.3% of the population would die without any measures, which would be ballpark 20,000-40,000 deaths in Nevada.
Yes, and models have proven themselves way inaccurate and grossly inflated in terms of estimated hospital needs. Thus, we should start easing up on the restrictions. Slowly and controlled.
Whatever you think of Goodman's premise, I think her manner during the interview did as much to sink her credibility as her arguments. She said some palpably dumb stuff (no matter who you plan to vote for in November) and ducked questions in silly and transparent ways.
In contrast, Sisolak did quite well for our state (again, regardless of whether you like Trump or not). He sounded empathetic, sensible and in command. He restored credibility to our state's politics that Goodman managed to shit all over in the space of ten-or-so minutes. I've never been a tremendous Sisolak fan but he did us proud last night.
We should be allowed to come out of our caves. As pointed out above, the hospitals aren't overwhelmed. That possibility didn't materialize. Let's get back to work. Let those who are vulnerable take precautions. Let's all act with prudence and keep our distance as much as possible. However, let's start opening back up. It'll progressively look political if we don't.
Ah yes let's sacrifice a million American lives so we don't "look political."
I'm worried about our health care workers. They need a break. Just because they are coping now, it doesn't mean they can keep it up. They are dealing with a lot of fear (for themselves and their families) and a lot of heartbreak (helping families say goodbye). I wish we could send them all off to a resort for a break before we start in stupid again.
This is an excellent point and refutes the one above regarding the health care system is not overwhelmed so lets go ahead and overwhelm it.
Our healthcare system is not overwhelmed, and opening the economy in a controlled manner doesn't appear it will overwhelm it. The models have been disastrously incorrect to date. With that, we should be able to get a little freedom. We can't SAG forever or even until a vaccine issues, which seems like what you're advocating.
SAH
Hi, thanks to everyone who is taking an interest in Department 15 this election cycle. I’m candidate Adam Breeden. I like the blog although I agree with one of the other posters that it can be a harsh place. However, I’ll put myself out here this time.
I’ve received a lot of what I would call “silent support” for my campaign. Many people are afraid to publicly oppose a sitting judge but realize Judge Hardy needs voted out. When I see comments on the blog like Judge Hardy “likes to scold lawyers and litigants. Lawyers don't forget” or “I like Joe Hardy personally but not as a judge. He gets tossed in my vote” it seems that others share a similar opinion of him. The comments about him simply being a political appointee are dead on as well.
Many people are asking about the 40% error rate on appeal. I don’t track this, it comes from another site that I have no association with. The current exact total as of today is 38.2% reversed, although it rises and falls as new decisions are announced. We have a number of judges that have less than a 10% error rate from this same organization which tracks these decisions. Based on what I’ve seen, Judge Hardy has at least double the average error rate and there’s a reason for that.
Voters should also know that if you want reasonable gun safety regulations, such as private party sale background checks, Judge Hardy is public enemy #1 for you. He ruled that the 2016 Ballot Initiative was unenforceable (the Defendant in that case was the Governor who recently appointed him to office and opposed the law). Part of his savvy legal reasoning was that the law didn’t say the Governor actually had to enforce or implement the law. No kidding. If you didn’t like that law, fine you won. In fact, I’m not a Second Amendment hater by any stretch. However, no one should support judges deciding cases based on politics and I don’t think background checks for gun sales is particularly polarizing…they’ve been required for 30+ years for dealer sales.
Hardy sanctioned an attorney more than $90,000 and it was vacated. He was reversed on another $3,000,000 verdict. He really messed up a TitleMax case where TitleMax was issuing clearly illegal loans as well, again reversed unanimously on appeal.
If you don’t know much about me, go to Facebook @breeden4judge or http://www.breeden4judge.com Thanks for the feedback and please do vote this year in the mail in primary.
You've told us why you think Joe Hardy sucks, but told us nothing about why you are capable of better. To paraphrase Bart Simpson, "I'm 10:55 AM, who the hell are you?"
I concur with 10:55 a.m. Adam. Tell us about you (other than reasonable gun safety regulations). I am familiar with Hardy's sanctions ruling that he was reversed on and his $3,000,000 verdict. Tell us more where Hardy gets it wrong that you will get it right.