My Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) made me do it; not guilty by reason of mental defect. I am confident there is a psychiatrist out there willing to play for pay.
psychiatrist play for pay
Over the years I have deposed psychiatrists. Many, I think were weird nuts with their own problems. As far as professional opinions, it seemed that they could always find a DSM III, IV or V condition to ascribe to a litigant.
I was a little surprised that the Nevada Supreme Court would choose to issue a decision on some name-change cases as an Advance Opinion rather than a unpublished disposition, until I read it. I’m sorry, but what kind of incompetent denies these *with prejudice* based on a lack of proper publication? Nice public smackdown for this judge.
Here is a fascinating advance opinion:
1. Published decision from CoA in Family Law case (there are 2 today)
2. Family law case with Brownstein Hyatt on one side and Kemp Jones on the other side.
Well one of the parties was making $600-800 a month and they were fighting over child support, so… seems to be it would be pro bono both sides given the law firms involved.
See this is where I have a problem with pro bono. There clearly is a result that the legal aid providers want out of this case. Pretending that pro bono could ably represent both sides without putting a thumb on the scale for the result that they want is simply silly.
The ex-wife, who had custody of the child, was getting screwed over.
A retired fireman, getting full PERS retirement pay was trying to avoid paying child support. The ex-wife, who was raising the child, was reduced to cleaning houses. A hearing master set the fireman’s child support to zero, nada, zilch. It took the mother years and multiple attempts to get that ruling overturned.
Guest
Anonymous
February 13, 2025 11:35 am
I heard about Robert Adams “retiring” and leaving from what is now again Eglet Law. However, where did Art Ham go?
Check out Eglet Law’s Website. They seem to be hiring the children and grandchildren of Nevada attorneys, including Robert Eglet’s daughter. Not to mention physician Mark Kabin’s offspring.
I recall someone once listing the ever-changing names of all of the Eglet law firms and partnerships over the years. It s quite a long list.
I had a jr. judge tell me that they routinely would grant them because there was no opposition. I had to explain that the nature of an ex parte application generally meant that there was no opportunity to oppose.
Assume you are a working lawyer and you currently need to continue to work and earn money to run your household, pay your mortgage, support your family, fund your kids’ college, save for retirement, etc. You need your paychecks.
Now suppose you were to somehow come into possession of a sum of money large enough that all those expenses are covered and more. It’s enough to allow you to live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle for the rest of your life, no matter how long you live. You could easily spend $300k per year without worry and pretty much live wherever you want to live. That kind of money.
Would you continue to work? Why or why not? Show your work.
I would burn my bar card and return it to the state bar with my voluntary resignation. I do not trust anyone, therefore I would change my name and leave and leave to parts unknown. Why I wouldn’t work? No good deed goes unpunished. I am tired of clients pretending to not understand that they need to provide a retainer before I provide legal services and that if they do not replenish said retainer during the case, I will not continue to provide legal services. My retainer is detailed and easy to ready.
I’d probably try to find an of counsel role with trusted colleagues, do the parts of the job I’m best at/enjoy the most when I want to.
Get insurance. (It does sound like you’re talking about the kind of wealth that can handle being self-insured, but that’s a very serious consideration).
Just get into Mass Torts or some other area of law that’s mostly monitoring.
There are parts of this job that I like, and I wouldn’t be adverse to taking some kind of role where I could just do those parts. Similar to what 1:07 proposes. I definitely wouldn’t try to maintain anything resembling a full-time position, though.
I would break into Tiffany’s at midnight. Do I go for the vault? No, I go for the chandelier. It’s priceless. As I’m taking it down, a woman catches me. She tells me to stop. It’s her father’s business. She’s Tiffany. I say no. We make love all night. In the morning, the cops come and I escape in one of their uniforms. I tell her to meet me in Mexico, but I go to Canada. I don’t trust her. Besides, I like the cold. Thirty years later, I get a postcard. I have a son and he’s the chief of police. This is where the story gets interesting. I tell Tiffany to meet me in Paris by the Trocadero. She’s been waiting for me all these years. She’s never taken another lover. I don’t care. I don’t show up. I go to Berlin. That’s where I stashed the chandelier.
I would absolutely continue to be active so that no one realized that I now was in possession of a sum of money large enough that all those expenses are covered and more and that I could live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle for the rest of my life. I would continue to tell people that I was slogging while knowing that I am probably fine so that no one targeted me. The only sign of change is that(1) I now would be much more selective of my cases, no longer feeling worried that it all would dry up tomorrow and (2) I would cut back on my therapy for anxiety from once every 2 weeks to once a month.
You need to remain an active attorney because you can not afford yourself and need a lawyer when you have a problem. But I would not practice. What for? Been there done that. It ain’t getting better.
I would stop working. I would buy a second home in Utah or some higher, arid elevation to live from June through September. I would continue to live in Las Vegas the rest of the year. I would continue to do some legal work, maybe keep one litigation case at a time. I think it would be fun to take on pro bono cases, of my choosing, where money would otherwise be determinative and just fuck over some bullies. Because I am crazy like that. And I can. And I don’t like you.
I’m doing that now and only accept interesting cases. Recently a dunce produced over 6000 pages of discovery. I reviewed each page. Beat him to a pulp at trial. This is the only way to enjoy practicing law.
There are probably a number of attorneys who have accumulated enough wealth to keep them more than afloat yet they keep slaving away instead of retiring. I am talking to those attorneys in their 70s and up. If you’re not a workaholic, take the money, stop working, and enjoy a slow life on an island.
Why? They like to or love it. Gives them purpose. Gives them a reason to get away from their wife/husband. Leads them to believe that they still have the chops. For those that this profession is the means to an end and cannot wait to get off of the treadmill, good for them. But there are a number of people who do this for more than the money.
VE should be prescribed for just about every peri- and menopausal woman as a standard of care. Not because some man suggests it, but because it relieves the severe symptoms that 30% of menopausal women experience. The fact that it isn’t has more to do with a lack of awareness than anything else.
Off topic, and I grieve for folks losing their jobs at the Federal government (regardless of your stance, losing your job is an awful experience). That said, can someone PLEASE fix the US Post Office? I paid the extra for USPS Express to get something from Vegas to Sacramento no later than 2 business days, and nothing worked – online information is boned (no info for days, currently says its at some distribution center), tracking the “lost” package is boned (they say it’s been filed, no further update or communication), package was actually delivered (a month or so late, and I know this because the enclosed check was cashed), and now I try to claim my money back guarantee and that’s not working. UPS is no better (they sold me this USPS product but don’t stand behind it). I wish a plague on all of those houses.
Trump worked to undermine the USPS in his first term. Imagine if people from 70 years ago could see all of this. “What the fuck are you people doing to this country? Why are you shitting on the USPS?”
USPS 1955 ≠ USPS 2025. I’d hope the people of seventy years ago would look at the lack of innovation, inefficiency, waste, and apathy of its workforce and want to tear the whole thing down. What a wasteful, state sanctioned monopoly over a dying industry. I check my mail once a month for a reason. It’s just an endless stream of paper garbage.
USPS is a damned national treasure. You bitch about inefficiency and waste and proclaim it a dying industry. I see a public service that is the envy of the world. I ALSO see a government service that acts as the backbone of a lot of e-commerce, as it provides last-mile delivery services. Parcels make up the majority of what the USPS does these days, not junkmail.
In my opinion, the USPS is a microcosm of the larger, decades-long Republican attack on government agencies that provide social services. To be fair, the assault on the postal service didn’t begin during Trump’s first term. It stretches back to the 1970s, with significant weakening changes enacted in the mid-2000s, most notably, legislation requiring the USPS to fully fund its retirement obligations decades in advance while simultaneously capping rate increases for mail at the rate of inflation.
This policy effectively set the agency up for financial distress while tying its hands on revenue generation. Congress has refused to subsidize this essential public service since the 1970s, yet it has repeatedly stepped in to micromanage how USPS operates, ensuring that it remains perpetually underfunded and unable to compete on fair terms. This is not an accident; it is a deliberate strategy.
The plight of the USPS is emblematic of the broader Republican approach to public services: defund, restrict, and then point to the resulting dysfunction as proof that government doesn’t work. It’s a blueprint they’ve used to justify the dismantling of public education, public transit, and public healthcare. We see it in crumbling school districts, in gutted transportation infrastructure, and in a healthcare system where basic treatment can bankrupt ordinary families. It is why we cannot have nice things in this country.
And yet, for many of us, these services have been invaluable. I attended a public university. I relied on public libraries from childhood through law school and still depend on their online resources today. I used USPS Media Mail to share books and music with friends across the country and to sell used books when I needed extra cash. These services weren’t just conveniences; they were lifelines. They created opportunities and expanded access to knowledge, communication, and economic mobility.
Where Republicans once played coy about their intentions, pretending their policies were about “efficiency” rather than destruction, the mask has slipped. With Trump II, the goal is explicit: break the system and then use the wreckage as justification for privatization.
Every other developed nation in the world understands the necessity of subsidizing essential public services. Countries with nationalized airlines, tuition-free higher education, and universal healthcare aren’t descending into socialist dystopias; they are ensuring that their economies function and their citizens thrive. Meanwhile, here in the U.S., we treat basic government functions as a grift to be looted until they collapse.
Supporting public services is not the same as advocating for socialism. Nobody is calling for nationalizing all industries or for central planning of the economy. My family fled communism in Europe, and I have no illusions about the failures of that system. But there is a vast difference between authoritarian state control and a government that ensures its citizens have access to the foundational services that make a society functional. The devastating effects of communism have been repeated to us all in rote. I fear that the devastating effects of unchecked, cowboy libertarianism, are about to be felt here at home.
Blame everything on trump even when the dems are in charge for a large amount of time and they never fix anything, glad I get to work with people like this
Yes, because the problems with USPS are caused by the Republicans!
And not at all by the bloat and garbage employees who grift off of our tax dollars and make exponentially more money than they would be able to make in the private sector. I see it now.
Who knew that “inability to remain silent when speaking to the police” was a disability?
Sex addiction. Worked for Doug Crawford
My Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) made me do it; not guilty by reason of mental defect. I am confident there is a psychiatrist out there willing to play for pay.
psychiatrist play for pay
Over the years I have deposed psychiatrists. Many, I think were weird nuts with their own problems. As far as professional opinions, it seemed that they could always find a DSM III, IV or V condition to ascribe to a litigant.
His name is Patel
I was a little surprised that the Nevada Supreme Court would choose to issue a decision on some name-change cases as an Advance Opinion rather than a unpublished disposition, until I read it. I’m sorry, but what kind of incompetent denies these *with prejudice* based on a lack of proper publication? Nice public smackdown for this judge.
Opinion is on fleek today.
what is the case name?
IN RE: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME (MARTINEZ) C/W 87857/88190
It’s listed on the Advance Opinion website as “IN RE: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME (FLEEK) C/W 88016/88190”
Just so everyone has them, here are the appellate decision links:
Advance Opinions (published): https://nvcourts.gov/supreme/decisions/advance_opinions
Unpublished Orders: https://nvcourts.gov/supreme/decisions/unpublished_orders
The “Attorneys, family of man killed by police, speak after meeting with DA” link goes to the Guymon story
Here is the KTNV link: https://www.ktnv.com/news/two-weeks-tops-for-decision-on-charges-against-las-vegas-officer-who-fatally-shot-brandon-durham
Here is a fascinating advance opinion:
1. Published decision from CoA in Family Law case (there are 2 today)
2. Family law case with Brownstein Hyatt on one side and Kemp Jones on the other side.
guessing the family law case was pro bono
Well is it pro bono on BOTH sides? Almost makes it appear that it would reek of being a cooked result if pro bono on both sides
Well one of the parties was making $600-800 a month and they were fighting over child support, so… seems to be it would be pro bono both sides given the law firms involved.
See this is where I have a problem with pro bono. There clearly is a result that the legal aid providers want out of this case. Pretending that pro bono could ably represent both sides without putting a thumb on the scale for the result that they want is simply silly.
The ex-wife, who had custody of the child, was getting screwed over.
A retired fireman, getting full PERS retirement pay was trying to avoid paying child support. The ex-wife, who was raising the child, was reduced to cleaning houses. A hearing master set the fireman’s child support to zero, nada, zilch. It took the mother years and multiple attempts to get that ruling overturned.
I heard about Robert Adams “retiring” and leaving from what is now again Eglet Law. However, where did Art Ham go?
Check out Eglet Law’s Website. They seem to be hiring the children and grandchildren of Nevada attorneys, including Robert Eglet’s daughter. Not to mention physician Mark Kabin’s offspring.
I recall someone once listing the ever-changing names of all of the Eglet law firms and partnerships over the years. It s quite a long list.
Sold the building to Dimopoulos.
Guymon’s AUDACITY is off the charts. No disability status for gorilla pimps
Civil motions on orders shortening time are abused. ‘Nuff said.
100X this.
deny them then
I had a jr. judge tell me that they routinely would grant them because there was no opposition. I had to explain that the nature of an ex parte application generally meant that there was no opportunity to oppose.
🙁
Hypothetical question:
Assume you are a working lawyer and you currently need to continue to work and earn money to run your household, pay your mortgage, support your family, fund your kids’ college, save for retirement, etc. You need your paychecks.
Now suppose you were to somehow come into possession of a sum of money large enough that all those expenses are covered and more. It’s enough to allow you to live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle for the rest of your life, no matter how long you live. You could easily spend $300k per year without worry and pretty much live wherever you want to live. That kind of money.
Would you continue to work? Why or why not? Show your work.
I would not continue to work, and as I will not be working, I will not be showing my work.
Stop working or work part-time and move to the beach.
I would burn my bar card and return it to the state bar with my voluntary resignation. I do not trust anyone, therefore I would change my name and leave and leave to parts unknown. Why I wouldn’t work? No good deed goes unpunished. I am tired of clients pretending to not understand that they need to provide a retainer before I provide legal services and that if they do not replenish said retainer during the case, I will not continue to provide legal services. My retainer is detailed and easy to ready.
I’d probably try to find an of counsel role with trusted colleagues, do the parts of the job I’m best at/enjoy the most when I want to.
Get insurance. (It does sound like you’re talking about the kind of wealth that can handle being self-insured, but that’s a very serious consideration).
Just get into Mass Torts or some other area of law that’s mostly monitoring.
There are parts of this job that I like, and I wouldn’t be adverse to taking some kind of role where I could just do those parts. Similar to what 1:07 proposes. I definitely wouldn’t try to maintain anything resembling a full-time position, though.
Would not work. Would move to a beach town on the Mediterranean. I hear Málaga is nice.
I would break into Tiffany’s at midnight. Do I go for the vault? No, I go for the chandelier. It’s priceless. As I’m taking it down, a woman catches me. She tells me to stop. It’s her father’s business. She’s Tiffany. I say no. We make love all night. In the morning, the cops come and I escape in one of their uniforms. I tell her to meet me in Mexico, but I go to Canada. I don’t trust her. Besides, I like the cold. Thirty years later, I get a postcard. I have a son and he’s the chief of police. This is where the story gets interesting. I tell Tiffany to meet me in Paris by the Trocadero. She’s been waiting for me all these years. She’s never taken another lover. I don’t care. I don’t show up. I go to Berlin. That’s where I stashed the chandelier.
I would absolutely continue to be active so that no one realized that I now was in possession of a sum of money large enough that all those expenses are covered and more and that I could live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle for the rest of my life. I would continue to tell people that I was slogging while knowing that I am probably fine so that no one targeted me. The only sign of change is that(1) I now would be much more selective of my cases, no longer feeling worried that it all would dry up tomorrow and (2) I would cut back on my therapy for anxiety from once every 2 weeks to once a month.
You need to remain an active attorney because you can not afford yourself and need a lawyer when you have a problem. But I would not practice. What for? Been there done that. It ain’t getting better.
I would stop working. I would buy a second home in Utah or some higher, arid elevation to live from June through September. I would continue to live in Las Vegas the rest of the year. I would continue to do some legal work, maybe keep one litigation case at a time. I think it would be fun to take on pro bono cases, of my choosing, where money would otherwise be determinative and just fuck over some bullies. Because I am crazy like that. And I can. And I don’t like you.
I’m doing that now and only accept interesting cases. Recently a dunce produced over 6000 pages of discovery. I reviewed each page. Beat him to a pulp at trial. This is the only way to enjoy practicing law.
Spare us your hypothetical questions ffs.
There are probably a number of attorneys who have accumulated enough wealth to keep them more than afloat yet they keep slaving away instead of retiring. I am talking to those attorneys in their 70s and up. If you’re not a workaholic, take the money, stop working, and enjoy a slow life on an island.
Why? They like to or love it. Gives them purpose. Gives them a reason to get away from their wife/husband. Leads them to believe that they still have the chops. For those that this profession is the means to an end and cannot wait to get off of the treadmill, good for them. But there are a number of people who do this for more than the money.
I’d be a cloud of dust. You MFers would never hear from me again.
this post title keeps making me hungry because I misread it as Dry Steak
Anyone who has a wife who has made it to menopause knows that the dry streak never ends
Have your wife talk to her urologist/ob-gyn about Vaginal Estrogen, bro. It’s a life changer. Cuts down on the UTIs, too.
Cannot get more mansplainy than telling your wife what to do with her vagina.
VE should be prescribed for just about every peri- and menopausal woman as a standard of care. Not because some man suggests it, but because it relieves the severe symptoms that 30% of menopausal women experience. The fact that it isn’t has more to do with a lack of awareness than anything else.
Urinary health is no joke, Jim.
Maybe you’re the reason for the dryness
Off topic, and I grieve for folks losing their jobs at the Federal government (regardless of your stance, losing your job is an awful experience). That said, can someone PLEASE fix the US Post Office? I paid the extra for USPS Express to get something from Vegas to Sacramento no later than 2 business days, and nothing worked – online information is boned (no info for days, currently says its at some distribution center), tracking the “lost” package is boned (they say it’s been filed, no further update or communication), package was actually delivered (a month or so late, and I know this because the enclosed check was cashed), and now I try to claim my money back guarantee and that’s not working. UPS is no better (they sold me this USPS product but don’t stand behind it). I wish a plague on all of those houses.
Trump worked to undermine the USPS in his first term. Imagine if people from 70 years ago could see all of this. “What the fuck are you people doing to this country? Why are you shitting on the USPS?”
USPS 1955 ≠ USPS 2025. I’d hope the people of seventy years ago would look at the lack of innovation, inefficiency, waste, and apathy of its workforce and want to tear the whole thing down. What a wasteful, state sanctioned monopoly over a dying industry. I check my mail once a month for a reason. It’s just an endless stream of paper garbage.
USPS is a damned national treasure. You bitch about inefficiency and waste and proclaim it a dying industry. I see a public service that is the envy of the world. I ALSO see a government service that acts as the backbone of a lot of e-commerce, as it provides last-mile delivery services. Parcels make up the majority of what the USPS does these days, not junkmail.
In my opinion, the USPS is a microcosm of the larger, decades-long Republican attack on government agencies that provide social services. To be fair, the assault on the postal service didn’t begin during Trump’s first term. It stretches back to the 1970s, with significant weakening changes enacted in the mid-2000s, most notably, legislation requiring the USPS to fully fund its retirement obligations decades in advance while simultaneously capping rate increases for mail at the rate of inflation.
This policy effectively set the agency up for financial distress while tying its hands on revenue generation. Congress has refused to subsidize this essential public service since the 1970s, yet it has repeatedly stepped in to micromanage how USPS operates, ensuring that it remains perpetually underfunded and unable to compete on fair terms. This is not an accident; it is a deliberate strategy.
The plight of the USPS is emblematic of the broader Republican approach to public services: defund, restrict, and then point to the resulting dysfunction as proof that government doesn’t work. It’s a blueprint they’ve used to justify the dismantling of public education, public transit, and public healthcare. We see it in crumbling school districts, in gutted transportation infrastructure, and in a healthcare system where basic treatment can bankrupt ordinary families. It is why we cannot have nice things in this country.
And yet, for many of us, these services have been invaluable. I attended a public university. I relied on public libraries from childhood through law school and still depend on their online resources today. I used USPS Media Mail to share books and music with friends across the country and to sell used books when I needed extra cash. These services weren’t just conveniences; they were lifelines. They created opportunities and expanded access to knowledge, communication, and economic mobility.
Where Republicans once played coy about their intentions, pretending their policies were about “efficiency” rather than destruction, the mask has slipped. With Trump II, the goal is explicit: break the system and then use the wreckage as justification for privatization.
Every other developed nation in the world understands the necessity of subsidizing essential public services. Countries with nationalized airlines, tuition-free higher education, and universal healthcare aren’t descending into socialist dystopias; they are ensuring that their economies function and their citizens thrive. Meanwhile, here in the U.S., we treat basic government functions as a grift to be looted until they collapse.
Supporting public services is not the same as advocating for socialism. Nobody is calling for nationalizing all industries or for central planning of the economy. My family fled communism in Europe, and I have no illusions about the failures of that system. But there is a vast difference between authoritarian state control and a government that ensures its citizens have access to the foundational services that make a society functional. The devastating effects of communism have been repeated to us all in rote. I fear that the devastating effects of unchecked, cowboy libertarianism, are about to be felt here at home.
Blame everything on trump even when the dems are in charge for a large amount of time and they never fix anything, glad I get to work with people like this
Yes, because the problems with USPS are caused by the Republicans!
And not at all by the bloat and garbage employees who grift off of our tax dollars and make exponentially more money than they would be able to make in the private sector. I see it now.