- law dawg
- 49 Comments
- 7259 Views
- Public defender Anna Stone wants Judge Erika Ballou disqualified, in part because of affair rumors. [RJ; 8NewsNow]
- Could a business court help Nevada compete with Delaware? [RJ]
- Unlawful stop or justified detention? City marshals’ legal battle continues. [KTNV]
- Two Las Vegas hotels sued over bedbugs. [8NewsNow]
- Former head of Nevada Equal Rights Commission sues state, alleging retaliation. [TNI]
“Affair rumors” is really burying the lede.
From the article:
“the public defender, Anna Lee Stone, says Ballou accused her in open court – using the most vulgar language – of f—ing her client, according to an affidavit seeking Ballou to be removed from criminal proceedings against Jermaine Demecio Garner.”
The judge, on the bench, accused a public defender of fucking her client. Wild.
Punt Ballou into the sun, she consistently degrades the court’s decorum and is a very poor representative for the bench. Enough of this sideshow circus.
Judge Ballou is an activist and I support what she supports. I’d love more judges that recognize the system is stacked against marginalized people and are willing to address that problem from the bench.
But the problem isn’t that she is an activist, it is that she is a BAD JUDGE. She goes well beyond the scope of her discretion to the point where she just ignores the law.
I’d be thrilled to replace her with just about anyone. That said, if a right wing activist runs against her, I’ll vote for Ballou. Of course, I’d only admit this in an anonymous forum.
doesn’t being an activist mean u have a potential “political” agenda when the Judge is supposed to be a-political ….
awwww guess all the libtards got offended
Beyond the pale. Go back to the Public Defender’s Office.
Please God no. We don’t want her back.
But is Anna Stone banging her client or not?
CLV – cut your losses re City Marshals. This will not end well.
Amen.
May they go the way of the Las Vegas Constable’s office.
So, let me get this straight, if the Marshals watch someone break the law, and they begin to pursue that individual, you want them to get to a borderline and then just stop chasing that individual? You think that will create safer communities? And you dont think people will know the borderline of their jurisdiction and high-tail it for that line? And you want the Marshals to just let them go?
Not the issue at all. But keep going.
There is a HUGE difference between this incomplete hypothetical and what is happening (and what is being sued on).
Let me break it down like a fraction for you.
The COLV Marshal’s are NOT following someone for breaking the law on the Fremont Street Experience (in their jurisdiction) and stopping them for non criminal traffic violations in Centennial Hills (decidedly NOT in their jurisdiction).
But that isn’t what happened. He was doing something on a highway that the city marshalls witnessed ON THE HIGHWAY and pulled him over. They didn’t witness the alleged incident somewhere they had jurisdiction and then follow him onto the highway, then pull him over there. They started and stopped this on the highway.
151 here.
That is exactly my point.
Myers got arrested for a DUI. You want a peace officer to just ignore the DUI and let him go after witnessing him swerving and following too closely? Idk about you, but I have a wife and young child. Having someone like Myers who was arrested for a DUI off the roads is good with me. Imaging the Marshals having to ignore it and then Myers kills someone while driving (allegedly) intoxicated.
In addition, the USSC said it plainly: “If a peace officer has probable cause to believe that an individual has committed even a minor criminal offense in his presence, he may arrest the offender.” Atwater v. City of Lago Vista. Myers Complaint should be dismissed outright.
@1:52p here – I started typing that response to @11:45a before your 1:51p response showed up, submitted it, and saw that you had submitted a similar response while I was typing. I guess I can add JINX now!
Hell yeah. Those marshalls gotta stop when their jurydicktion ends, or else the Duke Boys are gonna have to drive much farther away. And have you seen what gas costs in this economy?
same with court marshals too
I’m considering hanging out a shingle. Anyone have some high-level thoughts on PLLC vs. professional corp?
Does it really matter for attorneys? Isn’t NV law pretty clear that no entity protects you from mal practice claims and that attorneys as individuals are always the proper party to a malpractice case?
You could get sued for much more than a malpractice claim so yes start a business of some sort.
The only real difference is the statutory corporate formalities. PLLC has fewer and PC has more.
Aside from PLLC or PC, with PLLC likely involving less lifting to maintain in accordance with NRS formalities, you should consult with a CPA on whether you should form your entity as a S-Corp or C-Corp from a federal income tax perspective. You do not want to unintentionally wind up with an entity that is disregarded for federal income tax purposes.
The unpredictability of the 8th JD absolutely holds NV back when it comes to incorporation decisions. Glad to see that this proposal would be a constitutional amendment that makes these judges appointed, not elected, which is a necessary precondition to having a court system that businesses could actually trust.
The idea is a good one; however, I don’t know if the outcome will be as everyone desires. The number of seasoned Nevada attorneys litigating complex corporate issues under the NRS and NAC is relatively small and I don’t see them (or at least the ones comparable to Vice-Chancellors on the DE Chancery Court) giving up their practices to become civil servants subject to a nomination process. Before Nevada spends too much time on this effort, it would be great to see if the desired judicial pool exists.
How much would we need to pay these business court judges?
If we want to attract the types of judges that will get coastal mega-firms onboard with advising their clients to reincorporate in Nevada, I would say more than a little and likely closer to a lot.
If you don’t have to run for election, I think you could get some prominent individuals to do it as a kind of retirement. It’s the pain of getting elected and/or losing your seat to some no body that keeps people from doing it now. This would solve those problems.
This is a fair point but “you have the chance to found a court that will compete with the Court of Chancery” is a pretty good pitch to anyone who has made a good living and cares about legacy. And if you only serve X year terms (like in Delaware), and the court actually works, you’re setting yourself up for a gigantic payday when you leave the bench.
Also, couldn’t the same thing be said about the vice chancellors in Delaware? I assume anyone who is qualified enough to be appointed to Chancery Court can make bank as a Delaware lawyer. But the prestige and power go a long way for some people.
I have always had good experiences with Judge Ballou on my civil cases, and so I have bent over backwards to defend her up until now, here and elsewhere. But at some point when someone just continually shoots themselves in the foot like this, it becomes apparent that it is time to go. She lacks the temperament and the judgment to serve on the bench. Enough.
Well that’s one person. She hasn’t known what is going on in my matters on multiple occasions.
I’ve had, what I believe to be incorrect, rulings from her that were clearly designed to have an impact on the resolution of the case. Not fair and not cool. Unfortunately she’s not the only 8th judicial district judge that I’ve had this experience with.
I’ve been waiting on an order from a certain department 8th JD for 2 months! She took it under advisement. I keep following up and get nowhere. They issued what can only be described as an incomprehensible minute order yesterday setting a status check for a date that passed two weeks ago. WTH!
Be kind. She probably has a thousand cases on top of yours.
Who? You don’t have to name names. Just give us the department number.
I recently waited 18 months. The delay of time hurt the other party so I was fine with it.
Report of the Civil Bench Bar Meeting — May 13, 2025
Time: Noon to 1:00 PM
Location: Courtroom 10D & Zoom
________________________________________
I. Opening & Announcements
Representatives from Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, Nevada Legal Services, and the Senior Law Project provided updates on current pro bono initiatives. Attendees were encouraged to participate in upcoming CLEs and events, including:
• SNAWA Luncheon CLE (May 22)
• CCBA Professional Portrait Session (May 28)
• AI in Practice CLE (June 6)
• Health Care Power of Attorney-A-Thon (June 17)
________________________________________
II. Main Presentation: Sealing and Redacting Court Records
Presenters:
• Judge Tara Clark Newberry (Judicial overview of redaction standards)
• Anntoinette Naumec-Miller (Court Division Administrator – procedural authority)
• Rachel Chaisson (Records Supervisor – technical process and e-filing workflow)
This segment focused on improving compliance with the Nevada Rules for Sealing and Redacting Court Records (SRCR), particularly SRCR 1–5, and on standardizing electronic filing practices in Odyssey E-File & Serve.
________________________________________
A. Legal and Procedural Framework (Presented by Judge Tara Clark Newberry)
Judge Newberry provided a legal primer on the court’s obligations when parties request sealing or redacting civil court records. Highlights include:
• Presumption of public access: All court records are public unless sealing or redaction is justified under SRCR Rule 3.
• Required Findings for Redaction/Sealing (SRCR 3(4)):
o The court must enter specific, written findings showing that:
1. A compelling privacy or safety interest justifies the sealing;
2. That interest outweighs the public’s interest in access;
3. The least restrictive means (e.g., redaction before sealing) has been considered;
• Examples of valid grounds:
o Protection of restricted personal identifiers (e.g., SSNs, account numbers)
o Confidential settlement terms
o Medical or tax records
o Trade secrets or intellectual property (see NRS 600A.030(5))
• Prohibited Practices:
o Entire case files may not be sealed;
o Sealing may not be used to conceal a public hazard or circumvent public accountability;
o Party agreement alone is not sufficient.
________________________________________
B. Detailed Technical Workflow (Presented by Rachel Chaisson)
Rachel Chaisson’s PowerPoint provided step-by-step instructions for how to correctly file redacted, sealed, or stricken materials in Odyssey E-File & Serve. This portion is essential for law firms and paralegals handling sensitive material.
1. Redacting (SRCR + Odyssey Protocol)
Purpose: To obscure sensitive data in a public version while maintaining a complete sealed copy for judicial review.
Step-by-Step Process:
• In Odyssey E-File & Serve (same envelope):
1. File the redacted version using the appropriate document code (e.g., COMP, ANS, OBJ).
 Do not use TSPCA for redacted filings.
2. File the unredacted version using the TSPCA (Temporary Sealed Pending Court Approval) code.
3. File a Motion to Redact using code MSRC (Motion to Seal or Redact Court Record).
4. Submit an unsigned order to the judge via the Order in Chambers (OIC) queue.
Important Formatting Tips:
• Use clear blackouts or “[REDACTED]” notations—avoid subtle or gray overlays.
• Include a placeholder page where exhibits have been redacted, noting: “Exhibit 2 filed under seal via TSPCA.”
2. Sealing Entire Documents
Steps:
• File document to be sealed using TSPCA code.
• Motion to Seal filed as MSRC.
• Unsigned order submitted to OIC.
Use case examples include full medical records or unredacted compromise orders involving minors.
3. Partial Sealing of a Document (e.g., selected exhibits)
Steps:
• File public version using standard code (e.g., ANS, COMP), replacing sealed content with filler pages.
• File sealed portions separately using TSPCA.
• File a Motion to Seal (MSRC) and submit unsigned order to OIC.
This method is appropriate when, for example, one exhibit contains confidential tax records while the remainder of the pleading can be filed publicly.
4. Striking Content
Full Strike:
• File Motion to Strike using MSTR.
• Motion must specify document title and filing date.
• Submit unsigned order to OIC.
Partial Strike:
• File MSTR motion specifying the content or pages to be stricken.
• Include as an exhibit a marked-up copy of the original with proposed redactions.
• Submit unsigned order via OIC.
5. Special Case: Orders in Minor’s Compromise Petitions
• Orders must redact personal identifiers and banking information.
• If banks require an unredacted order to process funds:
o Submit both versions to OIC.
o Include this language in the redacted order:
“Upon request, the attorney of record may obtain a copy of this sealed order.”
________________________________________
C. Processing & Records Division Practices
Once an order is signed:
• Clerk’s Records Team:
o Updates the case metadata and applies redaction/sealing within 24 hours.
o Prioritizes sealing/striking/redaction orders as high urgency.
• Record Access:
o Copies of sealed orders may be requested by attorneys of record by emailing
recordsrequest@clarkcountycourts.us
o $0.50 per page fee; $3.00 extra for certification.
________________________________________
D. Key Contacts and Resources
• Filing Issues: Clerk’s Office – (702) 671-0530
• Records Division Inquiries: (702) 671-0555
• Records Forms & Guidance:
Clark County Courts – Records Search & Viewing
• Email for sealed order requests:
recordsrequest@clarkcountycourts.us
________________________________________
III. Appellate Case Summaries
Judge Newberry also discussed key recent appellate opinions:
1. Virgin Valley Water Dist. v. Paradise Canyon
• Issue: Lease interpretation and discretion in setting rental rates for water shares.
• Holding: The Supreme Court reversed the trial court, ruling that the District had sole and absolute discretion to set rates post-2020.
• Procedural errors cited: trial judge’s improper factfinding, biased jury instructions, and unfair time limitations (12 days for plaintiff, 2½ for defense).
• Relevance: Reinforces the judiciary’s role in interpreting unambiguous contracts and limits on implied covenants.
2. Black v. Eighth Judicial District Court (Goodchild)
• Issue: Whether shareholders could bring a direct claim for breach of fiduciary duty after a company’s bankruptcy.
• Holding: Supreme Court determined the claim was derivative, not direct. Only the bankruptcy trustee may pursue such claims.
• Relevance: Highlights standing limitations in fiduciary duty litigation where corporate injury is alleged.
3. Hernandez v. The Home Depot
• Certified question on whether a trademark licensor (Ridge Tool) can be held strictly liable for product defects.
• Holding: Nevada Supreme Court adopted §14 of the Restatement (Third) of Torts — no liability unless the licensor was directly involved in design/manufacture/distribution.
• Relevance: Clarifies liability boundaries in product defect cases involving trademark holders.
________________________________________
IV. Guidance for Paralegals on Redacting and Filing Under Seal
Step-by-Step Workflow:
1. Drafting
o Identify all restricted personal information (SSNs, account numbers, etc.).
o Create both redacted and unredacted versions.
2. Filing in Odyssey E-File & Serve
o Redacted version → use standard document code (e.g., COMP).
o Unredacted version → use TSPCA code.
o Motion to Redact → file under MSRC code.
o Order → submit unsigned through OIC.
3. Redaction Format
o Use black bars or brackets to obscure information.
o Include a note in the public version referencing the sealed content (e.g., “Exhibit 2 filed under seal”).
4. Best Practices
o Include justification for redaction/sealing under Rule 4 (e.g., privacy, safety, trade secret).
o Do not redact or seal entire files unless unavoidable.
o Ensure orders clearly indicate what is being redacted or sealed.
V. Conclusion
This bench bar session provided crucial instruction on redaction compliance and sealing processes, framed by a strong understanding of the applicable procedural rules and recent appellate decisions. The training and clarifications presented—particularly those led by Judge Newberry and the Records Division—offer practical value to attorneys and paralegals alike working within Clark County’s civil system.
I should look into using AI more in my practice. It does a great job summarizing meetings; and I presume would do the same for motions, judicial decisions, etc.
re: Hernandez v. Home Depot: That is some grade AAA bullshit reasoning. If the company that gets paid to allow its name to be slapped on a dangerous and defective piece of shit doesn’t bother to concern itself with the quality of the product, it can’t be held liable. But if it involves itself in the manufacuturing by, say, requiring that the product not be a piece of shit, it opens itself up to liability. And meanwhile, the consumer, having bought a Company A branded product, can’t sue Company A, but must somehow track down the identity of the actual manufacturer (Explosive Chinesium, Ltd.) or rely solely on suing the seller.
The opinion revolves around what makes the consumers safer. If the licensors were held liable for their licensed products being pieces of shit, they would be less likely to license products that were pieces of shit, making consumers safer.
To whoever provided this, thank you. I wasn’t able to attend and need to seal records, including medical records in minor’s comps, regularly.
You’re welcome. Judge Clark Newberry, Judge Sturman and the folks at the Clerk’s office indicated they would likely schedule a separate training session for paralegals and staff in the future. That session will be in person and via zoom. The Court seems committed to moving towards properly using TSPCA and away from the long standing practice of “in camera submissions” that are not part of the court record. This is something everyone is going to need to master, especially staff.
I’ve noticed a lot of job postings for estate planning lawyers lately. Is this because of boomers getting older and more demand? Is this area of law the next big money grab?
IMO, there is a huge increase in demand for estate planning lawyers in Nevada because so many people from other states, primarily California, are moving to Nevada and want to update their estate planning documents to reflect Nevada law.
I do the recruiting for our estate planning firm. We are constantly trying to find new ESPs not because of an influx of Californians but mostly because ESPs don’t typically jump firms. Once they’ve found a comfortable place they stop shopping for a new job. It’s one of the hardest attorney positions to fill because nobody is looking. In my experience.
Just a random thought. When I was starting law school I had an IRS issue, can’t even remember what it was now. I went to a lawyer named Thomas Crowe. He literally picked up the phone, made one call to some IRS number he had, and they never bothered me again with that issue. What a hero in my eyes. It was like he was magical. Anyway, that just popped into my mind today.
Sounds like your lawyer told the IRS to eat “Crowe.”
From his obituary: Thomas Edmund Crowe, Esq., of Las Vegas, passed away on Monday, March 22, 2021 after a cardiac arrest suffered on Thursday, March 18. He was 68 years old.
Over three decades in Las Vegas, Tom built a prominent practice, The Thomas E. Crowe Professional Law Corporation, focusing on tax/bankruptcy dispute resolution and litigation. His colleagues talk admiringly of Tom’s wit and willingness to take on more challenging cases. According to another prominent attorney, “Tom wasn’t afraid of doing anything.”
Sorry to hear that – RIP