Federal court caseloads in Nevada grow as vacancies on the bench go unfilled. [RJ]
Judge Rob Bare denied a motion by CCSD to vacate an arbitration award in favor of teachers. [eighthjdcourt blog]
Did the new Clark County administrator of human services violate ethics law? [RJ]
There have been 12 arrests so far as the rape test kit backlog gets reduced. [news3LV]
The mother accused of killing a four-year old boy was going to be released on her own recognizance by Pro Tem Justice Court Judge Jeannie Hua. [LasVegasNow]
If you want to apply to be a pro tem in Justice Court, the deadline is August 15. [CCBA]
Not encouraged by the response to the ethics situation. Ignorance of the law is no excuse so why would staff claiming not to know they can't jump ship and work for a place with a shiny new contract come into the discussion at all? I'm voting for Sisolak begrudgingly but he comes off terrible in the article.
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2018 7:08 pm
Who here in Nevada is right-wing enough and controversial enough to warrant a federal judicial appointment by the Trump White House?
Slow your roll, 12:44. Don't pretend that Trump isn't packing the federal bench with young hard-right lawyers. Even he'd admit that's what he's doing. The problem is that his people are not properly vetting these guys and it's been a bit of an embarrassment. For example:
Trump absolutely has the right to appoint jurists he sees as being aligned with his own philosophy. Where he's run into problems is in his vetting of candidates on their judicial qualifications. Whatever anyone thought of Scalia's political leanings, he had the proper background and temperament to be a federal judge. That isn't true for a lot of the folks the Trump administration is trying to put on the federal bench. Trump likes to fly his freak flag; but the judicial appointment process isn't the proper place for that. Appointing federal judges is a much more nuanced part of the presidency than, say, appointing cabinet members (an area where Trump has been able to act like he's still appearing on The Apprentice). Trump can't give guys like Anthony Scaramucci jobs with lifetime tenure.
@3:28 correct. And also immediately appointed to the State Taxicab Commission by Governor Sandoval – a six figure part-time job. He is very well connected to the local Republican party and was featured in national media about the presidential election. The usual rules don't seem to apply.
Did anyone notice that Ann Elworth is over at the Office of Bar Counsel? If she treats attorneys at the Bar the way she treated people who appeared in front of her for Traffic Court, shoot me now.
Fair? LOL you are quite funny. Yeah she is another in the line of people who have no experience in attorney discipline, have never run a law firm, have no clue what actual representation of clients would entail and who cannot give two shits about rights or process.
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2018 7:46 pm
As far as the article about the administrator being hired despite possibly violating ethics laws, this simply leads to a common narrative.
Arrogant commissioners or legislatures, when appointing someone, will pronounce how thorough their vetting process was, how they virtually spoke to every neighbor and grade school teacher such individual ever had. In short, how they know everything they need to know about this individual professionally and personally, from the highly relevant all the way down to the picky and insignificant.
But then when they are approached with something as obvious as the ethical controversy that is in operation here, they say "Duh..we didn't know that. Of course had we known it, it would have been critical to our issue of whether to hire him or not. But since we didn't know it, don't blame us."
But then wait a week when they are filling another positon, and they will insist that their super thorough vetting process is second to none, and no one gathers important information better than they do.
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2018 8:02 pm
An extension on what 12:46 wrote:
Obviously, this issue was too big or obvious for them to miss, and they are not to be believed if any of them claim they did not know.
A high level county director recommends a lucrative contract to a private company. He subsequently quits the county and takes a position with such private company, and now returns to the county as the director of another department.
I don't believe that they could be that incompetent not to know about any of this when they considered his recent application to return to the county in another leadership position. It's only believable if they did absolutely zero vetting, and somehow none of the commissioners knew of this situation and no one brought it to their attention.
I don't believe any of that for a minute.
They, for whatever reasons wanted this applicant in this position, were quite aware of the problem, and decided that when this ethical issue then breaks in the press they will, first, play dumb(which they are doing by claiming they knew nothing), and when playing dumb no longer works they will just claim that the violation is not a violation.
Ultimately, it will be decided that there is no violation, because it suits the powers that be to say so as they can then hope to save face, as well as keep the guy they wanted for this positon.
Guest
Anonymous
August 6, 2018 11:14 pm
Anyone have a sample Pro Tem letter of interest? What are they looking for? Whats the pay?
You literally just have to say you're interested. It pays peanuts. Depends on which pro tem position you get, but is an hourly rate like $40-50 an hour.
Not encouraged by the response to the ethics situation. Ignorance of the law is no excuse so why would staff claiming not to know they can't jump ship and work for a place with a shiny new contract come into the discussion at all? I'm voting for Sisolak begrudgingly but he comes off terrible in the article.
Who here in Nevada is right-wing enough and controversial enough to warrant a federal judicial appointment by the Trump White House?
Craig Mueller
kill me now.
Former Judge George Assad is reportedly on a short list for appointment.
12:08 Thanks for your post Pelosi
Hafen is available…
Elect Pedro, I mean Cadish.
George Assad???? He was a lousy Municipal judge, and then there is the issue of his son, the armed robber. . . .
Slow your roll, 12:44. Don't pretend that Trump isn't packing the federal bench with young hard-right lawyers. Even he'd admit that's what he's doing. The problem is that his people are not properly vetting these guys and it's been a bit of an embarrassment. For example:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/398577-bounds-formally-withdraws-after-mcconnell-cancels-vote
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/13/brett-talley-jeff-mateer-pulled-trump-after-grassl/
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/embarrassed-trump-judicial-pick-who-never-tried-case-withdraws-n830866
Trump absolutely has the right to appoint jurists he sees as being aligned with his own philosophy. Where he's run into problems is in his vetting of candidates on their judicial qualifications. Whatever anyone thought of Scalia's political leanings, he had the proper background and temperament to be a federal judge. That isn't true for a lot of the folks the Trump administration is trying to put on the federal bench. Trump likes to fly his freak flag; but the judicial appointment process isn't the proper place for that. Appointing federal judges is a much more nuanced part of the presidency than, say, appointing cabinet members (an area where Trump has been able to act like he's still appearing on The Apprentice). Trump can't give guys like Anthony Scaramucci jobs with lifetime tenure.
@3:28 correct. And also immediately appointed to the State Taxicab Commission by Governor Sandoval – a six figure part-time job. He is very well connected to the local Republican party and was featured in national media about the presidential election. The usual rules don't seem to apply.
I will take Pedro over her.
We need a Russian, what about Nikola?
Did anyone notice that Ann Elworth is over at the Office of Bar Counsel? If she treats attorneys at the Bar the way she treated people who appeared in front of her for Traffic Court, shoot me now.
She will be fair.
Fair? LOL you are quite funny. Yeah she is another in the line of people who have no experience in attorney discipline, have never run a law firm, have no clue what actual representation of clients would entail and who cannot give two shits about rights or process.
As far as the article about the administrator being hired despite possibly violating ethics laws, this simply leads to a common narrative.
Arrogant commissioners or legislatures, when appointing someone, will pronounce how thorough their vetting process was, how they virtually spoke to every neighbor and grade school teacher such individual ever had. In short, how they know everything they need to know about this individual professionally and personally, from the highly relevant all the way down to the picky and insignificant.
But then when they are approached with something as obvious as the ethical controversy that is in operation here, they say "Duh..we didn't know that. Of course had we known it, it would have been critical to our issue of whether to hire him or not. But since we didn't know it, don't blame us."
But then wait a week when they are filling another positon, and they will insist that their super thorough vetting process is second to none, and no one gathers important information better than they do.
An extension on what 12:46 wrote:
Obviously, this issue was too big or obvious for them to miss, and they are not to be believed if any of them claim they did not know.
A high level county director recommends a lucrative contract to a private company. He subsequently quits the county and takes a position with such private company, and now returns to the county as the director of another department.
I don't believe that they could be that incompetent not to know about any of this when they considered his recent application to return to the county in another leadership position. It's only believable if they did absolutely zero vetting, and somehow none of the commissioners knew of this situation and no one brought it to their attention.
I don't believe any of that for a minute.
They, for whatever reasons wanted this applicant in this position, were quite aware of the problem, and decided that when this ethical issue then breaks in the press they will, first, play dumb(which they are doing by claiming they knew nothing), and when playing dumb no longer works they will just claim that the violation is not a violation.
Ultimately, it will be decided that there is no violation, because it suits the powers that be to say so as they can then hope to save face, as well as keep the guy they wanted for this positon.
Anyone have a sample Pro Tem letter of interest? What are they looking for? Whats the pay?
You literally just have to say you're interested. It pays peanuts. Depends on which pro tem position you get, but is an hourly rate like $40-50 an hour.
It's fun and would make anyone a better lawyer. But the pay yes, is much closer to $40 an hour.