With no other information, based on the blood test results I would assume that a person with those drugs would be partying at a local day/night club. This guy was at work. What is the employer’s responsibility or liability for the safety of their high/stoned/intoxicated employee and/or the public? This is a very sad story. Common sense tells me that this person had a history of substance abuse. As it is highly likely that this person chose to ingest MDMA, methamphetamine, cocaine and THC for the first, second, or even third time at 6:00 a.m. while at work. What is an employer to do? Any employment lawyers out there?
Alex, re today’s title, the question is “How does the OBC hire new assistant bar counsels?”
Guest
Anonymous
October 22, 2024 10:17 am
82 year old woman’s claim is heartbreaking but I suspect legally tenuous once the actual facts come to light. If she had a legitimate bad faith claim, file it. Instead her public adjuster is hoping that public sympathy will get around the facts.
Agreed. Since the cancellation predated the claim the carrier will be OK. Where they get into trouble is when they do post-claim underwriting and determine after the claim was filed, that the policy was voidable because the insured was engaged in commercial activity.
IMHO, having never practiced in this area, the question comes down to were they legally justified in canceling the policy i.e. was she actually running a motorcycle repair shop out of the house as alleged. If not, then the policy should have remained in place and she’s entitled to compensation.
Guest
Anonymous
October 22, 2024 11:32 am
Weird how Sigurdson thinks she just doesn’t have to do what the Supreme Court says. When Ballou was acting like that, there was an uproar and the DA had to file something to make his hurt feelings known. Is someone going to file to force Sigurdson off entire categories of cases because she won’t follow Supreme Court orders?
I can’t read the story because it’s behind a paywall, but it looks like Sigurdson did do what the supreme court told her to do. She analyzed the factors this time and made a decision based on that. No?
No she didn’t. She’s dead set against allowing the press access to her court. She thinks she’s being clever. She needs referred to the commission on judicial discipline.
Read the article. She copied and pasted a list with zero analysis
Guest
Anonymous
October 22, 2024 1:31 pm
Unrelated to the discussion but how do you handle traffic tickets now? Do you have to appear in person? Judge denied Motion to place on calendar and I’m at a loss. Thanks!
if you mean Las Vegas Justice Court, you go to the window at Justice Court. you either qualify for reduction if you don’t have a history, or you pay the fine as a bond to go to a contested hearing (where the city/county doesn’t have to have any witnesses). if you win the contested hearing, you get the bond back. there is no prosecutor. just a traffic hearing commissioner.
Guest
Anonymous
October 22, 2024 2:49 pm
Oh the joys of having to tell your Family Court Judge that ripping the parties new ones for not following EDCR 2.____ is not really appropriate. And then telling the civil judges that their citations and enforcement of EDCR 5.______ is likewise not appropriate.
Except there was never a reason for EDCR 5 as it presently exists and everyone knows what you mean when you say 2.34 and I’m sure you’re super cool in court and at parties. Dork.
4:36 here…when I said there was never a reason for EDCR 5 as it presently exists, did you think I did not know that EDCR 5 applies to family court? As if I was opining that a rule had no purpose without knowing that rule? FWIW Rule 5 is essentially a repetition of the entire EDCR with little tweeks to appease a certain ego down on Bonanza Rd who likes to sit on the rules committee.
Too wasted to work, but not too wasted to drive home? Maybe Baiguen v. Harrah’s will get NDOC off the hook?
With no other information, based on the blood test results I would assume that a person with those drugs would be partying at a local day/night club. This guy was at work. What is the employer’s responsibility or liability for the safety of their high/stoned/intoxicated employee and/or the public? This is a very sad story. Common sense tells me that this person had a history of substance abuse. As it is highly likely that this person chose to ingest MDMA, methamphetamine, cocaine and THC for the first, second, or even third time at 6:00 a.m. while at work. What is an employer to do? Any employment lawyers out there?
It was reported that there is policy for a supervisor to drive sick/impaired employees home.
Provide an Uber home
Baiguen v. Harrahs – apples and oranges.
Criminal practitioners, any real chance the Fiore wins her motion for acquittal?
no
it depends
Alex, re today’s title, the question is “How does the OBC hire new assistant bar counsels?”
82 year old woman’s claim is heartbreaking but I suspect legally tenuous once the actual facts come to light. If she had a legitimate bad faith claim, file it. Instead her public adjuster is hoping that public sympathy will get around the facts.
If the facts are on your side, hammer the facts. If the law is on your side, hammer the law.
If neither? Hammer public sentiment.
Agreed. Since the cancellation predated the claim the carrier will be OK. Where they get into trouble is when they do post-claim underwriting and determine after the claim was filed, that the policy was voidable because the insured was engaged in commercial activity.
“the fire started there, and a cigarette butt doesn’t stay lit”
Smokey Bear ’bout to break this lady in half.
Why would you set your place on fire *after* the policy was cancelled?
IMHO, having never practiced in this area, the question comes down to were they legally justified in canceling the policy i.e. was she actually running a motorcycle repair shop out of the house as alleged. If not, then the policy should have remained in place and she’s entitled to compensation.
Weird how Sigurdson thinks she just doesn’t have to do what the Supreme Court says. When Ballou was acting like that, there was an uproar and the DA had to file something to make his hurt feelings known. Is someone going to file to force Sigurdson off entire categories of cases because she won’t follow Supreme Court orders?
I can’t read the story because it’s behind a paywall, but it looks like Sigurdson did do what the supreme court told her to do. She analyzed the factors this time and made a decision based on that. No?
https://www.removepaywall.com/
No she didn’t. She’s dead set against allowing the press access to her court. She thinks she’s being clever. She needs referred to the commission on judicial discipline.
Read the article. She copied and pasted a list with zero analysis
Unrelated to the discussion but how do you handle traffic tickets now? Do you have to appear in person? Judge denied Motion to place on calendar and I’m at a loss. Thanks!
Which court?
Justice Court, listed as a civil matter and not traffic but was a speeding ticket
if you mean Las Vegas Justice Court, you go to the window at Justice Court. you either qualify for reduction if you don’t have a history, or you pay the fine as a bond to go to a contested hearing (where the city/county doesn’t have to have any witnesses). if you win the contested hearing, you get the bond back. there is no prosecutor. just a traffic hearing commissioner.
Oh the joys of having to tell your Family Court Judge that ripping the parties new ones for not following EDCR 2.____ is not really appropriate. And then telling the civil judges that their citations and enforcement of EDCR 5.______ is likewise not appropriate.
rules? where we’re going, we don’t need rules.
Except there was never a reason for EDCR 5 as it presently exists and everyone knows what you mean when you say 2.34 and I’m sure you’re super cool in court and at parties. Dork.
true but also only EDCR 5 applies in family court
4:36 here…when I said there was never a reason for EDCR 5 as it presently exists, did you think I did not know that EDCR 5 applies to family court? As if I was opining that a rule had no purpose without knowing that rule? FWIW Rule 5 is essentially a repetition of the entire EDCR with little tweeks to appease a certain ego down on Bonanza Rd who likes to sit on the rules committee.