- Quickdraw McLaw
- 55 Comments
- 472 Views
- Carson City District Court Judge James Wilson issued an order denying the Trump campaign’s effort to stop processing of mail ballots in Clark County. [TNI]
- The Nevada Supreme Court sides with Steve Wynn in defamation case against AP. [RJ]
- Judge Jim Crockett ruled that the Clark County Coroner must release hundreds of non-redacted child autopsies to the RJ. [AP]
- A longtime reader wrote in and is “interested in hearing from the LVLB community as to favorite people/companies for depositions, service of process, etc. I’m focusing on litigation but I wouldn’t shut the door on other types of vendors. I know these types of requests/recommendations have come up every once in a while over the years, but it would be great if we could update for the current situation (pandemic, WFH, etc.).” So, what recommendations do you have? Has a certain vendor made your life much easier this year? What is your favorite court reporting company?
These challenges to the voting process have been brought in bad faith, IMO. It's voter suppression, straight up. I can't imagine that every equity partner at MAC is a Trump supporter or ok with their brand being associated with this effort. And this isn't the first time. Remember in 2016 when Judge Sturman made national headlines for righteously berating MAC counsel for attempting to obtain the identities of poll workers? If I was an equity partner at MAC, I would have a huge problem with this. How is it that they are all in support of this, or at least, all silent?
I take it you are against all law firms that defend the accused in criminal proceedings? Us old timers take to heart that every man is entitled to counsel and his day in court. Too progressive for you, eh?
Let's cut to the chase: your fascist sentiments are ridiculous and childish, but precisely because it is the dominant force among the young and dumb today, there will be riots. Intolerance leads to violence.
It's been a long time since I was with a large(ish) firm, but most would have some kind of executive or management committee that would have to sign off on taking a case like this. Hard to believe that the name partners in that firm approved of this or appreciate having their names plastered all over it.
Why do you think Aurbach and Coffing are both running for judge? Seems like a dignified way to dip out before the inevitable.
Because their firm was folding years ago. They are running 9n your PPP money.
Aurbach is staunchly a D. But this litigation is precisely the type of big important litigation that MAC used to be deeply entrenched in.
MAC's Brian Hardy, who lost this case, also was the one who received the drubbing from Sturman in 2016.
I hadn't realized that MAC was representing the plaintiff in this voter suppression effort. But now that I know, it makes me feel better about the fact that I did not vote for Aurbach or Coffing.
@10:00 a.m. – lol you say the OP has ridiculous and chilish "fascist sentiments" for calling out MAC for representing an absolutely frivolous lawsuit that is 100% nothing more than yet another thinly veiled attempt by Trump to suppress votes? I don't know what is worse, you apparently defending the merits of this or actually suggesting that everyone is entitled to legal representations somehow equates with bringing, maintaining and endorsing any lawsuit, regardless of how horribly it is brought in bad faith. An accused's right to a legal defense is not the same as affirmatively bringing a bullshit lawsuit, utilized for the singular purpose to weaponize voter suppression. My condolences to anyone who retained you as their lawyer – you shame yourself and the legal profession.
@2:58
I really don't understand your point of view. No one's vote is sought to be suppressed. In fact, you could walk right into a voting booth today. My Word!
What is important is assuring the mail in ballot process. Part of the hearing was an observer who testified that ballot signatures that look nothing like the signature on file, are being accepted.
I agree with 2:58. Just because someone has a right to counsel in criminal proceedings doesn't mean you have to take their garbage civil case. That's just a cop out. Have some integrity and don't clog up our courts with your nonsense. 3:15 needs to pull their head out of Laxalt's tookus. Of course there was an observer who saw ballot signatures that didn't match…of course there was. And they definitely are not partisan and they have the best, most excellent vision and they took a hand writing comparison class at trump university. Can't win so you have to suppress the vote.
Hot thread! May the best man from New York win!
I don’t think Trump will win here, and I will lay out my reasons why. But I think the damage inflicted by the president and his apparatchiks will last a long time, no matter who occupies The White House. The evil these men have done will live long after the election is interred, and we all should remember the names of the Trump Nevada campaign helmsmen and operatives who carried out their orders, amoral hacks or barristers-for-rent.
They don’t care about election integrity; indeed, they are bereft of integrity. And the rhetoric they have spewed and the lawsuits they have filed have little to do with ballot-counting transparency and everything to do with voter suppression.
Trump has openly said ballots cast by mail that have not been counted by Election Day should not be counted at all, thus disenfranchising Americans exercising their rights and defying state law. And the Trumpers here have tried to cast doubt on the election process in Clark County, hinting at some elaborate, anti-Republican conspiracy without a shred of evidence and all the while smearing good people.
They hope that not enough ballots will be counted to give Joe Biden a clear victory here on Election Night — and then they can begin trying to get ballots tossed. Everyone should know this is the game, a most dangerous one that undermines the very underpinnings of our electoral system.
This is not a theory; this is the president saying the quiet part out loud.
These people are terrified of too many people voting because they can read recent election results and current voter/registration numbers: This state leans blue and has since ’08.
Those of you who have followed me through the years know I can laugh and mock with the best of them. I have often said if not for a sense of humor, I would have been on the Amalfi Coast or in a pine box long ago.
But this is too important not to be approached with the degree of solemnity and outrage it warrants.
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/biden-will-win-nevada-blue-wave-should-help-down-ballot
My fear is that the D's create enough doubt about the election with fake news and fake ballots that Trump's landslide can questioned. Then the DNC street thugs, Antifa and BLM, storm the Whitehouse, hoping that the Secret Service opens fire, thus justifying another round of impeachments.
We'll find out soon.
Riiiiight, 10:53. Because it is the Democrats who have been lying for four damn years about voter fraud, claiming Cheetolini only lost the popular vote because millions of people voted illegally for Clinton.
Because it's the Democrats who launched a voting integrity commission that was going to prove the "millions" claims, but was disbanded when it turned out no such thing actually happened.
Because it's the Democrats who have filed (and lost) suit after suit after suit trying to prevent people from voting.
Because it's the Democrats who are even now claiming that the votes must all be counted and the result known by 11:59 November 3rd, even though that has never happened in the history of the nation, nor is it grounded in reality.
Because it's the Democrats who said to mail in a vote, and then try to vote a second time.
Trumpism is being rejected, thank God. This alternate reality his supporters live in will come crashing down.
I agree Trumpism is being rejected, but only by a bit. My fear is that his supporters will regroup and continue with their exhausting conspiracy theory/misinformation campaigns and ultimately succeed in poisoning the minds of Americans.
And I agree any rejection is incremental. If Biden wins Lord knows there's plenty of agenda items but I think #1 now has to be election reform. There need to be clear laws against vote suppression not just norms so task one should be ensuring everyone who wants to vote can readily do so in the future.
Trumpism being rejected?? Wishful thinking. The only thing larger than the 2016 Trump wave is the 2020 Trump wave. Rallies, parades and boat lines miles long. You're dreaming if you thing this is rejection.
┏━━┓┏━━┓┏━━┓┏━━┓
┗━┓┃┃┏┓┃┗━┓┃┃┏┓┃
┏━┛┃┃┃┃┃┏━┛┃┃┃┃┃
KEEP AMERICA GREAT
┃┏━┛┃┃┃┃┃┏━┛┃┃┃┃
┃┗━┓┃┗┛┃┃┗━┓┃┗┛┃
┗━━┛┗━━┛┗━━┛┗━━
2:21 Very unlikely. I think the GOP when it not only loses the WH but loses the Senate and loses seats in the House is going to pretend this last 4 years was just a bad dream, a cult of personality dream, and will work to bring the Lincoln Project people and centrist Republicans back into the fold. If they do not, us Republicans face being relegated to the scrap heap of minority status for a very long time.
Predictions for tomorrow's judicial races?
Notice I didn't ask who you want to win, but objectively opine on who is likely to win.
Does Judge Scotti survive? Seems like a toss up to me.
Kephart? Probably he's safe, much to the chagrin of many attorneys.
Most of the other RJC incumbents seem to have rather limited opposition, no major media controversy, and will probably win handily, in my view.
As to the RJC open seats, any predictions?
Anyone want to weigh on any of those Family Court seats?(there's a gazillion contested races there).
As for the NSC race, Herndon probably wins with room to spare. Fumo has placed the majority of his campaign on the Fred Steese matter, but it does not really resonate.
People will receive Fumo flyer about Fred Steese being wrongfully convicted in like 1995,and then receive two Herndon flyers about how he has served as a judge since 2005 and has been one of the highest rated judges. That causes people to presume, even if wrongfully, that there is a lot they are not being told about the Steese matter.
I think you captured the race quite well, not much to add. I'm a bit surprised how well some have done without appearing to spend much money on their campaign – Ballou comes to mind. Tells me that the voting public does some dart-throwing at the ballot, or simply goes with the name that sounds good…I might have just described myself there, oh well.
I disagree. I predict many RJC upsets including losses for Villani, Scotti, Kephart, and Bare. I also see Aurbach losing wile coffing will win.
10:48–9:54 here. please remember I asked who you think will win, not who you want to win.
I think most objective, competent political operatives would probably conclude that Bare and Villani are quite safe.
They would also conclude that Kephart is even safer than Bare and Villani, although I realize how troubling it is to acknowledge something like that. I can truly understand, and relate to, that sentiment.
I agree Coffing wins, Scotti may well lose and Aurbach is toss up at best.
You did not mention the Johnsons, Kishner, etc. Presumably that is because they simply have no meaningful opposition, and should cruise to victory.
I still maintain most of the public either knows nothing of the Steese matter, or doesn't understand or care, and Herndon wins NSC.
-Bita wins 1 (no one is confused by Jacob Villani's ads)
-Scotti does not survive and it is a shame.
-Adam Ganz loses in 3 in a result I did not see 3 months ago.
-Aurbach and Coffing win (with Aurbach's being a squeaker)
-Incumbents roll (including Kephart huge)
-23 has no good candidates but Karl Armstrong has actually advertised
–10:03- Like 23, I see Ballou doing far better than her ad spend would reveal but losing ultimately narrowly as Gilliam has campaigned much better. She was the first name on the ballot and a woman on the ballot. Those two factors are killers. Being a woman is a huge advantage in races this year.
@9:54 & 10:56: 10:48 here, and those are not my choices for who I want to win, it is who I believe will win, and not because of Fred Steese, but because the general public knows nothing about judges and will generally pick the female. Like it or not, those are my actual predictions. I agree, though, that Herndon will win, not that I want him to. Many of the voters won't know who the incumbent is when looking at the names and will just pick the one that sounds best to them, or the female.
I don't have any predictions, but I am very curious to see if/how mail in ballots effect judicial elections. I think it might be possible that endorsements from labor, firefighter and police groups will matter less than they have (they will still definitely matter though).
I have done my part to get the word out on Kephart, but, unfortunately, I suspect that he will win. That's really sad for the judiciary in this state. Democracy is messy.
I don't know enough about these RJC races to weigh in, but the posters saying how Fumo should not have put all his eggs in the Fred Steese basket are quite correct.
For every Fumo mailer they receive, which pronounces an innocent man serving 25 years in prison, they revive three Herndon mailers stating that Herndon has been one of the highest rated judges for 15 years, which leads people to believe there is a lot more to the Steese matter, even if there may in fact not be.
Herndon also has a gazillion more signs.
Also, Herndon is quite good looking. And that is not just a factor for female candidates.
All that said, I voted for Fumo but I'll wind up on the losing end of that one.
There is seemingly an urge to punish Herndon for something that seems, by all objective accounts, mainly on his co-prosecutor now-Judge K. But I have not seen one poster argue that Fumo would be a better judge than Herndon based upon his legal ability.
For what it's worth, here are my judicial predictions:
Herndon
Bush
Villani
Kierney
Trujillo
Krall
Coffing
Bluth
Atkin
Albertson
Holthus
Eller
Johnson
Reynolds
Johnson
Spells
Ballou
Jones
Kishner
Craig
I really hope that I'm wrong on quite a few of those, but they would be my picks if I were a gambling man. Haven't thought too much about family court; does anyone have any predictions there?
5:48 — BUSH ???? I'm curious, how do you figure that?
The average voter who knows nothing about the judges will be who decides, and the average voter will pick the name Bush over Bulla
5:48 is spot in in predictions. Young females get elected.
Pretty spot on, except, as one poster already pointed out, the Bush over Bulla prediction.
It is true,as the poster says, that all other things being equal, people will choose the name Bush over Bulla.
But all other things are not equal. Bulla has seriously outspent Bush and that will presumably affect the outcome.
But, on the other hand, often in judicial races the superior spender loses–and sometimes even if they outspend their opponent by 2 to 1 or even 3 to I.
So the poster is right that the way a name sounds, compared to another name, is huge. Gender is also huge, but not a factor in this race as thy're both female.
I voted for Bush. She has a chance of winning.
This comment has been removed by the author.
9:54–besides, most law-and order-voters, as well as many other middle-of the-road voters, don't care much about an isolated wrongful conviction.
They like hard-charging prosecutors and they assume if there is an occasional mistake that the wrongfully convicted person winds up being very well-compensated, and that the wrongfully convicted person probably committed multiple crimes they were never apprehended for.
That's what the majority of voters think, I hate to say, and Fumo should know that. I'm not suggesting he should ignore the Steese matter. It can certainly be an issue, but he has made it like the only main issue–and that was ill-advised.
My firm primarily uses Litigation Services for deposition, interpreters, etc. They have always been very helpful and accommodating. They also seem to be very in tune with changes due to Covid and WFH.
Does anyone have a phone number to the Clerk's office that actually gets you a real live person?
702-455-4472 (press 9). It will say jury services. Just press 9. Takes you to the clerk's office.
I have total confidence that the election will be handled with the same integrity, efficiency, transparency and effectiveness that other state managed programs (DETR,DMV, etc.) are handled. I just can't wait to see how our governor handles future vaccine distribution. His success in managing our state is second to none!
And let's not forget the State Bar!
face | palm
Uggh, I fear that you are both right.
Any truth to the social media rumors that Gov. Sisolak had a large Halloween party Saturday where masks were optional and cell phones taken at the door?
I like a rumor that inherently has an excuse for the fact that there is no evidence backing it up (cell phones were seized).
https://twitter.com/440_happygal/status/1322651465844957191?s=20
https://twitter.com/SNalani/status/1322675809706930176?s=20
https://twitter.com/Gluk78355651/status/1322704273956761601?s=20
Are these "fake news" tweets?
I see tweets linking to some dude's facebook post accusing Gov of having a party. Given the number of likes and RTs, I'm not sure how that would qualify as "news" let alone "fake news."
But to answer OP's question as to whether there is any truth to it, I seriously doubt he'd do something so blatantly stupid, but I have no idea. But one thing I do know is the strategy of suggesting something nefarious is happening by "just asking" about it is getting to be a tired tactic of the Trumpers.
Those tweets are just weirdos repeating what 10:49 said. It's like magic. They say it enough and suddenly it MUST be true. How nice to live in a world so devoid of fact.
10:49, don't know if it's true(seems highly unlikely), but if his 2022 re-election opponent claims it is true, and runs ads with a bunch of unmasked partiers with a booming voice over "Governor Sisolak and his pals partied on while he was busy shutting down you and your business", it may well hurt his re-election chances.
Question: Does anyone have any general advice on how to vote in judicial elections? Have not been in vegas very long so I do not have any opinions or even know who any of the candidates are. I was thinking of just voting against all incumbents for some reason, but I am not sure why. Assuming the ballot even tells you who the incumbent is, never voted in NV before.
Many incumbents are good judges. Some are not. Here is a good resource to learn about the candidates: https://thenevadaindependent.com/election/2020/judicial
READ THESE:
https://thenevadaindependent.com/election/2020/judicial/nv-8/dept-19
No one on our legal team had much good to say about Judge Kephart. One called him the “worst judge on the bench,” another agreed that Kephart is “quite poor” on the bench and yet another said: “He doesn’t have a jurist’s demeanor.”
https://www.propublica.org/article/las-vegas-judge-bill-kephart-history-of-prosecutorial-misconduct
https://www.propublica.org/article/alford-pleas-fred-steese-conviction-without-admitting-guilt
I you don't know anything about the candidate, leave both circles empty.
For conservatives, I would recommend going to Chuck Muth's website's recommendations. htt ps://muthstr uths.com/2020generale lection/
Delete the extra spaces. I am not sure if this site requires the extra spaces or not.
I did not vote Chuck's slate 100%, but when both Chuck and "he who must not be named" support the same candidate, I am pretty happy to accept their mutual recommendation. When Chuck and "he who must" disagree, I do some more research. And of course, I use my personal knowledge of several of the judges and candidates.
Most incumbents suck, except Susan Johnson and David Jones. No Bonnie Bulla.
Good Lord, let the election end all the phone calls, emails, and junk mail. Please.