Our condolences go out to all those affected by the shooting yesterday, especially the families of the two Metro officers. [8NewsNow]
More details have emerged about how the HOA scandal was run, but no new details on the involvement of the attorneys. [RJ]
Clark County named the 18 winners of medical marijuana licenses on Friday. There will likely be law suits about the process including whether the open meeting law was violated and/or whether commissioners improperly took contributions from applicants prior to the hearing. [8NewsNow; RalstonReports]
Is the rise in Nevada attorneys being prosecuted a surprising trend, a factor of the bad economy, or par for the courts course? [RJ]
I am so sympathetic to the two officers and their families. I am so sympathetic to the innocent woman who was killed as well. Many prayers for these people for going through these atrocities.
I can't find any information on a female victim. The death toll seems to be:
Officer Alyn Beck, leaving behind a wife and 3 kids.
Officer Igor Soldo, leaving behind a wife and baby.
Joseph Robert Wilcox, who confronted the male shooter and was bushwacked by the female shooter.
Jerad Miller, shooter, currently burning in hell.
Amanda Miller, shooter, currently burning in hell.
One of the articles I saw online early Monday did talk about the discrepancy – they announced that the victim in Wal Mart was a male, not female, and indicated that previous reports saying that the victim being female were wrong.
What I'd really like to know is whether the person holding the CCW permit and who shot (and injured) one of the two perpetrators was indeed the guy who lost his life. I've seen suggestions and hints discussing this, but no positive affirmations stating it.
My apologies, my sympathy and prayers go out to Joseph Wilcox. All heros, Mr. Wilcox and the two officers.
Guest
Anonymous
June 9, 2014 6:30 pm
Neal Tomlinson and Pat Byrne got separate licenses? Hope their competition doesn't create friction at Snell & Wilmer partnership meetings. On the other hand, maybe the firm events will be a little more enjoyable and they'll be able to wear jeans on Fridays or some hippy bullsh#$ like that. It's 420 somewhere, bro.
Guest
Anonymous
June 9, 2014 10:18 pm
That RJ article is quite the laundry list of bad attorneys. No mention of Judge Jones and his federal indictment.
Guest
Anonymous
June 10, 2014 1:24 am
At least somebody is weeding out attorneys that violate the law, since the state bar does nothing and attorneys like Kazel and Stoffel still practice law and run for Judge while in court refuse to provide discovery, fabricate false evidence, and commit perjury, just my opinion
matter before the Nevada Supreme Court lets wait for this Appeal to be heard
Guest
Anonymous
June 10, 2014 1:38 am
Has anyone heard of SCR 172 does anyone enforce it or is the Rule allowed to be broken claiming litigation privilage and attorney privilage
Guest
Anonymous
June 10, 2014 2:05 am
6:38 I think you have been misinformed. Just looked at the NVSC rules on the Legislature's website and there is no rule 172
used to be Rule 172 now rule 3.3 it addresses candor ro the court
Under ethics of course some Nevada lawyers have no ethics, anyway i looked at the Appeal I think the Supreme Court may have a field day with this one Kazel files a lawsuit against a pro per litigant and the litigant counter sued. Kazel an attorney was compelled to produce her proofs 3 times and failed to do so her case was dismissed against the pro per litigant the gist of the appeal is the pro se litigant is asking for a default judgment for his counter claim against attorney Kazel the pro se filer believes Kazels refusal to provide compelled proofs should be an admission of his causes of action against Kazel for abuse of process. Lets see how the Supreme Court deals with this may be interesting
Guest
Anonymous
June 10, 2014 4:22 am
You may be right then lawyers in Nevada are allowed to fabricate, evidence, lie in court and in pleadings. No wonder the family court is a circus
I love this commenter who has a vendetta against Stoffel and Kazel who spends way too much time leaving comments on blogs about an appeal that nobody cares about. And I'm pretty sure he/she is pretending to be multiple people responding to his/her previous comments. I've had some crazy clients in the past, so I have sympathy for whichever attorney had to deal with this person.
Guest
Anonymous
June 10, 2014 6:35 pm
Thank you Wendy for your input, bur some of us honest ethical lawyers care. My opinion only so do not sue me because your feelings got hurt.
Are you really so oblivious that you don't realize all of us know you are the same person each time you comment and that you more than likely aren't really a lawyer.
do you realize this is a board for lawyers, are you an idiot, who are you, "Wendy Kazel", You read and post on a blog and then complain when people post on it.get a life or sue to have this blog closed, idiot
@9:17PM: it is clear that you are not an attorney. Maybe one of your various "personalities" has delusions of being an attorney. If you are an attorney, you are probably the worst attorney in town, which is saying a lot. That said, I hope you stick around this blog for a while, just for the entertainment value of watching you post comments and then following up with comments agreeing with your previous comments. Good stuff.
Guest
Anonymous
June 11, 2014 5:25 am
Reminder: :A gag order preventing participants from making extrajudicial statements about their own cases amounts to a prior restraint on speech and undermines First Amendment rights. Prior restraints are subject to strict scrutiny because of the peculiar dangers presented by such restraints.The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may enter a gag order only when: “(1) the activity restrained poses either a clear and present danger or a serious and imminent threat to a protected competing interest, (2) the order is narrowly drawn, and (3) less restrictive alternatives are not available.” So if you do not like what is posted here do not read it. This is an open blog for free expressions of opinion no matter whose opinion it is.
Guest
Anonymous
June 11, 2014 9:30 am
Posts and comments published herein generally consist of rumors, speculation, assumptions, gossip and opinions. As a result, the content and links posted herein may very well contain erroneous or inaccurate information and/or information that may change over time. The owner/bloggers/posters/moderators of this site cannot and do not ensure the accuracy of any content presented herein. Moreover, the content posted herein is intended for entertainment purposes only; nothing published herein should be construed or relied upon as legal advice or as constituting an attorney-client relationship.
I am so sympathetic to the two officers and their families. I am so sympathetic to the innocent woman who was killed as well. Many prayers for these people for going through these atrocities.
I can't find any information on a female victim. The death toll seems to be:
Officer Alyn Beck, leaving behind a wife and 3 kids.
Officer Igor Soldo, leaving behind a wife and baby.
Joseph Robert Wilcox, who confronted the male shooter and was bushwacked by the female shooter.
Jerad Miller, shooter, currently burning in hell.
Amanda Miller, shooter, currently burning in hell.
One of the articles I saw online early Monday did talk about the discrepancy – they announced that the victim in Wal Mart was a male, not female, and indicated that previous reports saying that the victim being female were wrong.
What I'd really like to know is whether the person holding the CCW permit and who shot (and injured) one of the two perpetrators was indeed the guy who lost his life. I've seen suggestions and hints discussing this, but no positive affirmations stating it.
Wilcox (the CCW holder) didn't injure anyone. He was killed by Amanda before he fired a single round.
My apologies, my sympathy and prayers go out to Joseph Wilcox. All heros, Mr. Wilcox and the two officers.
Neal Tomlinson and Pat Byrne got separate licenses? Hope their competition doesn't create friction at Snell & Wilmer partnership meetings. On the other hand, maybe the firm events will be a little more enjoyable and they'll be able to wear jeans on Fridays or some hippy bullsh#$ like that. It's 420 somewhere, bro.
That RJ article is quite the laundry list of bad attorneys. No mention of Judge Jones and his federal indictment.
At least somebody is weeding out attorneys that violate the law, since the state bar does nothing and attorneys like Kazel and Stoffel still practice law and run for Judge while in court refuse to provide discovery, fabricate false evidence, and commit perjury, just my opinion
matter before the Nevada Supreme Court lets wait for this Appeal to be heard
Has anyone heard of SCR 172 does anyone enforce it or is the Rule allowed to be broken claiming litigation privilage and attorney privilage
6:38 I think you have been misinformed. Just looked at the NVSC rules on the Legislature's website and there is no rule 172
used to be Rule 172 now rule 3.3 it addresses candor ro the court
Under ethics of course some Nevada lawyers have no ethics, anyway i looked at the Appeal I think the Supreme Court may have a field day with this one Kazel files a lawsuit against a pro per litigant and the litigant counter sued. Kazel an attorney was compelled to produce her proofs 3 times and failed to do so her case was dismissed against the pro per litigant the gist of the appeal is the pro se litigant is asking for a default judgment for his counter claim against attorney Kazel the pro se filer believes Kazels refusal to provide compelled proofs should be an admission of his causes of action against Kazel for abuse of process. Lets see how the Supreme Court deals with this may be interesting
You may be right then lawyers in Nevada are allowed to fabricate, evidence, lie in court and in pleadings. No wonder the family court is a circus
I love this commenter who has a vendetta against Stoffel and Kazel who spends way too much time leaving comments on blogs about an appeal that nobody cares about. And I'm pretty sure he/she is pretending to be multiple people responding to his/her previous comments. I've had some crazy clients in the past, so I have sympathy for whichever attorney had to deal with this person.
Thank you Wendy for your input, bur some of us honest ethical lawyers care. My opinion only so do not sue me because your feelings got hurt.
Are you really so oblivious that you don't realize all of us know you are the same person each time you comment and that you more than likely aren't really a lawyer.
Who are you talking to? Who is Wendy? I seriously doubt that you are a lawyer.
I feel like I am watching a schizophrenic person fight with him/herself. This is hilarious!
do you realize this is a board for lawyers, are you an idiot, who are you, "Wendy Kazel", You read and post on a blog and then complain when people post on it.get a life or sue to have this blog closed, idiot
Someone does not like First Amendment Rights and unhappy with a blog, Oh my God get real !!!!!!!!!!!
@9:17PM: it is clear that you are not an attorney. Maybe one of your various "personalities" has delusions of being an attorney. If you are an attorney, you are probably the worst attorney in town, which is saying a lot. That said, I hope you stick around this blog for a while, just for the entertainment value of watching you post comments and then following up with comments agreeing with your previous comments. Good stuff.
Reminder: :A gag order preventing participants from making extrajudicial statements about their own cases amounts to a prior restraint on speech and undermines First Amendment rights. Prior restraints are subject to strict scrutiny because of the peculiar dangers presented by such restraints.The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may enter a gag order only when: “(1) the activity restrained poses either a clear and present danger or a serious and imminent threat to a protected competing interest, (2) the order is narrowly drawn, and (3) less restrictive alternatives are not available.” So if you do not like what is posted here do not read it. This is an open blog for free expressions of opinion no matter whose opinion it is.
Posts and comments published herein generally consist of rumors, speculation, assumptions, gossip and opinions. As a result, the content and links posted herein may very well contain erroneous or inaccurate information and/or information that may change over time. The owner/bloggers/posters/moderators of this site cannot and do not ensure the accuracy of any content presented herein. Moreover, the content posted herein is intended for entertainment purposes only; nothing published herein should be construed or relied upon as legal advice or as constituting an attorney-client relationship.