- Quickdraw McLaw
- 37 Comments
- 607 Views
And last, but not least, in our Judicial Primary Primer, we have Family Court Department T. In one corner, we have Judge Gayle Nathan. In the other corners, we have our contenders Lisa M. Brown and Maria Maskall.
Let us have it? Which one of these three ladies should be the Judge in Department T next year?
Who should the people vote for in Family Court Department T?
Gayle has a 40% error rate lol.
These elections are a parade of horribles.
Lisa Brown changed her name.Her name before was Lisa Kent She lost to Ken Pollock in 2008. She was not showing up for work and was taking forever to decide things. Gayle Nathan is controversial but at least works hard. Family Court Judges have to decide tough cases and one side is always unhappy. They have to make tough calls.
Thank you. This is the kind of information that needs to be shared.
lol Really? Made up information with absolutely no evidence to support it is the "kind of information that needs to be shared"…. Really? Calling Gayle Nathan "controversial" is kind of like calling a hurricane a "light breeze." That label doesn't even begin to describe the havoc Nathan has wrought on the lives of Nevada families. As the admin has pointed out, Nathan has a 40% error rate… if she works any "harder," we might have to add another justice on the SC just to reverse all of Nathan's crap! http://www.ournevadajudges.com/#judges – This site will tell you all you need to know about Gayle Nathan's ability to properly apply the law.
Nice to see people finally using the site lol. Check out Susan Johnson with 34% errors on 138 cases. What's really amazing is the amount of writ petitions granted against her. Holy moly.
Just Google Gayle Nathan, you'll find all the information you need to know that she needs to be replaced. There is no need for the Judge to treat people so rudely. Too bad the selection for this department is mediocre. Nathan's Peremptory Challenge rate is too high, which says enough. For anyone that doesn't practice in family court, a man is lucky if he can get out of her courtroom without taking a few blows from her.
These posts are fine. But the question of the week is whether judge Ramsey is going to be indicted
Where is the rule that governs specialization? Candidates are advertising that they have been certified by the State Bar as specialists in family law. I see the list of people who have "registered their specialization" but I can't find a rule that says what that means.
@ 3:36; check the Bar's web page for the Family Law Specialization. Exam is offered 1 x per year. Must achieve 85% correct to pass. As I recall, 50% of your work must be in Family Law, principal counsel must have a minimum of 35 contested cases per year in Family Law, and a minimum of the contested matters must be trials at least 2 hours in length, 8 attorney references, 2 judge references, you must have a minimum of 18 CLE's in Family Law, have a minimum of 5 years experience, no discipline and $500,000 in professional liability insurance. And then there is the exam itself…
@ 2:40, Most of Nathan's preemptory challenges from ERDF. They hate her because she ratted them out to George Knapp for the UPL. Check the RJ story last spring on this subject.
That's been argued before, but the analysis of this issue, by attorneys and the media, has repeatedly demonstrated that even if you eliminate all the challenges that originate from ERDF(on account of their notary being reflected on paperwork in the case), she still has a dramatically higher rate than any other judge. That's what the numbers demonstrate time and again, even if she wants to spin it otherwise. Apparently, she continues to blame most of her problems on ERDF. I heard that there is one Family Judge she barely speaks to simply because when he was in practice he received referrals from ERDF. The only way she can improve is to take responsibility for her own performance, and stop looking to assign blame to outside sources. Now that all being said, there is admittedly a very high number of challenges of her that do originate from ERDF. But she has had over three years to establish that she harbors no gender bias. But ERDF clearly still believes she harbors such bias, and the hard truth is a lot of attorneys(with no association with ERDF) feel exactly the same way. To give credit where it's due, as one poster observed, she works a lot harder than one of her challengers, who is a former judge.
Bull – 35% is not "most." (That's the number Nathan claimed.) Even if ERDF files half of them, that still leave half that someone else is filing.
Also… 2008 was not "last spring" – Had they been engaged in UPL, they wouldn't still be in the business of helping fathers safeguard their relationships with their children. What is your criteria for "working hard?" The fact that her Court is actively avoided, how "hard" can she be working? And how can you compare the sitting judge's caseload with one who is no longer on the bench? And are you just comparing raw numbers? That hardly seems appropriate given that each case is unique. I have no idea how the numbers stack up, but I would much rather have a judge that offers my case the time it needs — rather than some Court run like Lucy and Ethel's candy assembly line.
7:32 and 9:36 distill the basic point that can't be escaped: Even removing all the challenges submitted by ERDF clients, she still has far more remaining challenges than any other judge. I heard it is such a problem that judicial leadership felt compelled to address it, in order to try to assure that other judges are not unfairly burdened by the constant flow of cases being removed from her court.
She's been loudly, repeatedly and publicly blaming ERDF for her problems since taking the Bench in 2010. People can think what they want about ERDF, but even their harshest critics realize the numbers don't lie and that most of the challenges to Judge Nathan are filed by attorneys and litigants with no association with ERDF. The only possible road to significant improvement, as 7:32 suggests, is for the judge to have some insight, accountability and self-awareness, and stop blaming a legal assistance service, operated by one middle-aged activist, for her overall performance as a judge. Also, as to the other judge she pupotedly dislikes, her antipathy toward him appears to stem from his past association with ERDF, even though such judge, since taking the Bench, has received some criticism from ERDF for being too "Pro Mom" in the assessment of ERDF. This is just further evidence of what appears to be Judge Nathan's somewhat unhealthy fixation on ERDF. She appears to condemn those who ever had any association with the organization, which certainly explains why attorneys who receive ERDF referrals would routinely submit a peremptory challenge. And the basic point she is missing is that if she wants to assure attorneys and the public that she has no gender bias, she should not be relentlessly attacking a group devoted to helping fathers navigate through the system, and blaming them for her problems. This simply reinforces the perception of gender bias, which first got public traction ten years ago when, on Channel 8, she condemned the organization and its members as savages, or terrorists, or something of that ilk. And she and/or her supporters appear proud of such behavior. 2:40, above, proudly trumpets that Judge Nathan "ratted out" ERDF on Channel 8. And ERDF is known for always aggressively fighting back, so anytime she blames them for her performance and reputation, it becomes a very visible, very aggressive public conflict which keeps alive the issue of perceived gender bias. According to her, ERDF is the complete cause of not only her astronomical peremptory challenge rate, but is also responsible for her low scores on the attorney survey, as well as her checkered reputation. Everyone is responsible for creating and maintaining their own reputation, which can be accomplished by an adherence to behave with honor and integrity. Again, it is highly unreasonable, and not particularly rational, for a judge to blame their flawed reputation on some small, store front organization in a deteriorating old shopping plaza. Get a grip!
You seem to have answered the question yourself by stating "attorneys who receive ERDF referrals would routinely submit a peremptory challenge…" What other department does this occur in? None. Go, in your words, "Get a grip!" Oh, and they are engaged in UPL. The Bar has done the same with this organization as they do with any paralegal who practices law: Nothing. Perhaps the new notary requirements will at make ERDF pur their name on documents.
Again, not in dispute that ERDF routinely files peremptory challenges on her. And not in dispute that UPL remains a problem in the county. But also not in dispute that once you remove the ERDF challenges, she still has significantly more challenges than any other judge-not as high as a couple years ago, but still an issue.
Don’t take referrals from ERDF or work with them in any way. Find Judge Nathan to be biased against males in her courtroom and, if given the opportunity, ALWAYS preempt her from hearing any case where I represent the father. I especially like appearing before her when opposing counsel is a man and represents the father. In my experience I get a twofer of bench love in those circumstances. Maybe it is just those male attorneys or those particular male litigants I see her beating up and she is fair and nice to all the rest…but I doubt it.
Who is ERDF?
Equal Rights for Divorced Fathers. They assist fathers in the drafting of documents, and they have several attorneys they refer cases to for those fathers that can afford an attorney. They regularly file a peremptory challenge on any cases that they are assisting on if those cases involve Judge Nathan. Apparently, the lively discussion in this thread centers around the assertion that Judge Nathan and her supporters blame ERDF for her high rate of peremptory challenges, while her critics argue that even if the peremptory challenges submitted by ERDF are not counted, that she would still have far more peremptory challenges than any other judge. And apparently these challenges are largely caused by a perceived gender bias. I don't know how critical or important this debate is because I don't necessarily feel that peremptory challenges are the primary or most important way to measure a judge's performance. Some people put emphasis on this factor, while others emphasize judicial survey results, appeal rates, or general, word-of-mouth reputation.
ERDF is owned by attorney Kurt Harris since 2014
So who knows anything about Maria Maskall?
I know she made a comment (during one of her many, many attempts to gain a judgeship) a few years back that concerned me greatly. She said that she believed that every comment made in court that couldn't be proven truthful should be turned over to the DA for prosecution for perjury… Right. Our courts are not clogged up enough without her stalling everything because Dad's income was $50 more a month than he thought it was. /sarc
Does anyone else have any information on Maskall? Comments are showing discontentment (to be polite) with the incumbant and Lisa Brown, but nothing on Maskall. Internet search only shows she previously ran against Jones in 2010 and lost. Law firm website shows expirence in criminal and civil, but nothing about family law expirence. Is she a good attorney? Is she difficult or easy to deal with? Does she even practice family law?
She used to go by the name Aurora M Maskall and practiced personal injury according to yelp. Back in 08, she was with Bob Dickerson's firm practicing family law. I am not sure how long she was there before switching over to do PI… before Dickerson, she clerked with Cynthia Steel. Before that, she was in DC doing criminal copyright stuff for recording artists. I think this means prosecuting napster level crimes. lol I have heard through the grapevine that she has increased her family law cases recently.
Aurora/Maria has done a great number of Family Law cases, even though she is presently with a firm that largely does construction defect. I think she has been with Lee Hernandez for around 9 years. However her pro bono efforts in Family law matters garnered her to the Attorney of the Year like 3 years ago. So yes, she does do Family Law. And before being hit with the allegation that I am her, no. I have known her for around 12 years and do not refer any Family Law cases to her. However she is truly the least of the evils in this race and would be judicial.
Maria joined Lee Hernandez et al in 2003 and is now of counsel to that Firm. Although Lee Hernandez primarily handles constructional defect and insurance defense matters, Maria has focused her practice almost exclusively in the area of family law and has consistently contributed to our community through her pro bono and other bar activities. I have referred family law cases to Maria on multiple occasions with the full confidence that she will do the best professional job. I am Andrew Craner and have had the pleasure of knowing Maria for over twelve years as a colleague and friend. .
Does she go by a different name now to hide the ethics violation? But I wouldn't vote for Maskall in a million years. My comment is at AnonymousOctober 31, 2014 at 5:08 AM
Just how many times (5 already?) is she going to run before she slimes her way into the family court to make everyone suffer there.
LISA M. BROWN I just want to say that I know Lisa Brown personally and can tell you with every breath in me that she is completely dedicated to the children and families and also to her job. She is kind, smart and works hard to do the right thing. It means the world to her to be able to help families in Department T. She would make the perfect Judge for Department T.
Maybe if the Male Gayle (aka her law clerk) were on the ballot, I would consider voting for him, but as it is, there is no intelligent choice other than to vote for Lisa Brown, who by the way, should have never lost to the troll, Ken Pollack!
lol Male Gayle seems to be missing the most important qualification for a judge – Sound judgment.
I've stood before Gayle Nathan with my heart in my throat and a reasonable expectation that no judge would ever allow siblings to be split up, least of all to allow the mother to leave the state with no job, no housing, no credentials and no savings. Little did I know the breadth and depth of this woman's corrupt soul. What person would allow such a thing? Tell a little girl that it's ok that her mother takes her away from her brothers? Don't even try convince me that this soulless creature deserves another MINUTE in office. If her future includes investigation, shame, ridicule, disbarment and incarceration… It won't be NEAR enough to tip the scales back to even.
Your story is all too familiar. I am so sorry for all that your family has endured.
Vote Lisa Brown Kent !
GOOGLE BERSELL VS PATTON SAVE THE CHILDREN.
I am a female mother of two who has spent countless amounts of money in court to have Gayle Nathan show up an hour late and dismiss my hearings. She did not read any of the case prior to the hearing. Then proceeded tonleave early because she didnt know what was going on!! She is ruining the lives of innocent children.
Maria Maskall I have met. And she is a joke. She is so busy running for elections, 5 times already! that she does not file basic things on time. Resulting in court proceedings to be stalled and having the other counsel show up fully prepared for no reason. I am not a lawyer. Her demeanor is silly and she tries not to laugh while stating the lies of those she represents. She has been called out for lying and threatened about it multiple times. She would be a HORRIBLE addition to the family courts.Her court room would be a circus. I will be voting for Lisa Brown.
http://www.harmfulerror.com/2008/08/standing_committee_on_judicial_1.html