- Quickdraw McLaw
- 26 Comments
- 158 Views
- Governor Sisolak quietly vetoed four bills. [TNI]
- Judge Nancy Allf dismissed a lawsuit against Resorts World aimed at getting justice for wrongful deaths in Resorts World Manila massacre. [RJ]
- MAT specialty court alumni gathering set to bring support to those in recovery. [eighthjdcourt blog]
- Is it time for the Legislature to comply with open meeting laws? [TNI]
He should veto pot lounges.
He won't be vetoing anything else from this legislature; the constitutional deadline to veto bills ran on Friday, June 11, 2021.
Would prefer he bar venues that serve the devils juice rather than the hippie lettuce. The facts are clear: Alcohol destroys people and families. Weed, at worse, simply makes the lazy and sleepy for a while.
He should veto the new "to hell with landlords" bill. It makes it impossible to evict tenants no matter WHAT the tenant is doing to the rental, provided the tenant just asks for rental assistance. Tenant can be running a meth lab, burning the lawn with gasoline, tearing out walls, murdering neighbors, literally anything that violates the lease or the law in general. Once the tenant files for rental assistance, the tenant cannot be evicted no matter what, for any reason, at all, until the rental assistance process is completed. This can take months if not over a year to complete. It's an absolutely asinine way to endlessly extend the eviction moratorium without requiring Sisolak to look like a crazy person for extending it again.
Going forward, couldn't a landlord just have the tenant waive this in the Lease Agreement?
No. See NRS 118A.220.
Resort World
It's Flag Day and Sheldon Cooper could have figured this one out. But did Pltf's lawyer? Did he take CivPro in law school, is he a Boyd grad?
Plaintiffs don't reside in Nevada, NV Corp entity not connected to Philippines entity, and the event did not happen in Nevada. Federal diversity jurisdiction maybe if someone in Nevada can show standing, but not state court jurisdiction.
Pltf's counsel not a Boyd grad – University of San Diego School of Law c/o 1995.
Hard to fault the guy for what's essentially a Hail Mary
Sure it is. Waste all your time, D's time, and the court's time filing a lawsuit that has a 100% chance of getting dismissed for lack of PJ? I think we all have better things to do.
Judge Allf dismisses the case involving the Resorts World tragedy, on account that the hotel is located in the Philippines, that is where the tragedy occurred, that is where all the witnesses and other evidence is located, etc.
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs then say they will appeal the matter. But they do not place the emphasis on matters which could have some arguable relevance(such as Resort World, despite being located in Manila, obtained Nevada gaming licenses in 2013, etc.)but instead declare that the main basis for their appeal is that no justice can ever be had in the Philippines.
In my estimation, the attorneys just guaranteed a losing appeal(to the extent they had much of a chance to begin with).
The attorneys sets themselves up whereby they can only prevail with their appeal if the NSC publicly agrees with their theme that the Philippines is a corrupt, Third World shit hole.
Problem is regardless of what some isolated justices scattered through the U.S. may possibly privately think, it is inconceivable that the majority of any appellate court in the U.S. would ever publicly buy in with such an inflammatory, seemingly racist, abusive theory.
So, I pose the question to the two posters who identify themselves–Ben Nadig and Jordan Ross-what do you think?
And what do anonymous posters think?
The Philippines ( and Hatti) are factually third world shit holes. The Philippines courts and government are notoriously corrupt.
Neither condition bestows jurisdiction on the Nevada District Courts. The complaint was a frivolous, publicity seeking, filing, I would be asking for sanctions, fees and costs.
Is Nevada corrupt third world shit-hole? Asking for a friend who has seen some, lets say, "questionable" court decisions?
I'd take a Filipino Court over the Shitholeos here in Nevada. Haiti not so much.
June 14, 2021 at 1:03 PM – Thank you for asking. A few comments and observations:
1) I cannot emphasize enough that I am not an attorney, but that being said I have a strong dedication for the support of the rule of law and the process necessary to support that. If the plaintiff's counsel submitted their brief knowing full well the jurisdictional issue made this case DOA, then I think they should thank the judge for just dismissing and not admonishing counsel. There is nothing wrong with making a public statement on a public policy issue, but a court of law is not the proper venue. One of the hallmarks of a good judge is not allowing their courtroom to be used as a theatrical stage. Speaking not as an attorney but a court officer and a citizen, courts need to be places of measured, civil discourse.
2) While not accounting for all the corruption faced by developing nations, the U.S. imposed international drug enforcement regime provides fuel for much of the corruption in the world.
3) U.S. support in the past for authoritarian and corrupt governments without criticism so long as they passed the anti-communist litmus test certainly did not help develop a culture of integrity and the rule of law.
4) I have no interest in commenting on racist baiting vulgar characterizations of the Philippines or any other nation. The Philippines is an amazing country with enormous potential and I have a positive outlook that believes that it will in fact fulfill it's great potential as this century moves forward.
Look for the good and you're likely to find it. Everyone have a great day.
Yes, 1:42. The attorney knows, or should know, they have no chance, so they make that Anti-Philippines statement purely for grand-standing media consumption.
Problem is an attorney shooting their mouth off in a very public manner, where they lambast a whole country of people and their government, has long-ranging consequences–and even more so considering the current climate.
From now on virtually all opposing counsel will remind the court(at hearings and in their briefs) that we are dealing with an attorney who publicly condemned an entire race of people and their government, and that no justice could ever be realized in their county, etc. And this will be done even when that Anti-Philippine sentiment has no real relevance to the proceeding at issue–which, presumably, will be virtually all the proceedings.
All of this ignores the obvious irony that the most likely people to be offended by all this is Americans who were born here and know very little about the Philippines, or any other foreign cultures for that matter.
But naturalized US citizens who grew up in the Philippines, or current US non-citizen residents who likewise spent most of their life in the Philippines, are often the first to admit that many forms of corruption are rampant over there.
But the same can be said about many countries, including many so-called advanced countries that could never be considered Third World. Hell, we obviously have plenty of corruption right here in the U.S.(federal, state, and local levels).
But the whole point being whether or not it is entirely unreasonable to think these Anti-Philippines Government sentiments, and privately share them with others, or whether or not the statements can be viewed as largely true or not, is not the focus.
The focus is an attorney should appreciate they cannot make such ethnocentric(read: seemingly racist) remarks in a public media forum incident to a legal case they are litigating.
I hear what you all are saying and that the attorney never should have said no justice can be realized in the Philippines, and I of course agree that such subjective, and highly charged, viewpoint has no real relevance on the determination of where the matter is to be heard.
But, to give the devil his due, despite the fact it was a highly ill-advised, and even outrageous, statement for an attorney to make to the media following an adverse ruling, the postings here seem to suggest that a race of people is being condemned.
I took it to be more of a statement about corruption of Philippines government, not a direct indictment on average people of the Philippines who have no real government power.
Now one could counter that by saying that in essence the people are their government, that people get the government they deserve, and if the people tolerate corruption, that they bear some of the responsibility for that, etc.
But that over-simplification is often not true and there are millions of decent, yet oppressed, people all over the globe who deserve a lot better government than the one they toil under.
Still, a really, really outrageous, unjustifiable remark. Clear case of an attorney who is their own worst enemy and who shoots themself in the foot.
Any chance of victory on appeal(which may have been minimal at best to begin with) is totally eliminated if the main theme on appeal winds up being that some other country really, really sucks in the opinion of the appellate attorney.
I think this issue does merit all this discussion as I have been licensed since the 80's and have never seen an attorney proclaim something so bizarre for broad media consideration–essentially that the trial court was in error by not taking judicial notice the justice is impossible in a specified country.
It is a factor for considering where to litigate a claim. There is actually decent law you can sue in the US if the company is based here etc…. There are a lot of hurdles, but there is law saying you can. Many hotels have been sued in US for things that happen overseas. For example, Hilton can be sued in US sometimes for something that happens in another country. Need some specific facts to tie it back here, but it is possible.
This Philippines discussion reminds me of a well known and oft cited family court case in which the attorney for the mother actually argued at the supreme court that the district court judge should have recused herself because the mother and the father were both attractive and that judge was known not to like attractive female litigants.
I mean…the reputation was not incorrect, but I sure as hell would not have signed my name on those filings. Now she will forever be the attorney who argued her client was too pretty.
I agree that there is corruption in the Philippines, but President Duterte has been fighting it. However, an appropriate payment to the judge's brother's wife could turn the tables in favor of the victims of the shooting/fire. I was not involved in this case and I do not know the judge who was presiding, but when justice is for sale, just be sure you are represented at the auction!
Phillipines Legal system–Got a story. When getting sworn into a bar in another state which allowed admission on motion, I was waiting with an attorney from the Phillipines. He attended school in the Phillilpines and the school was supposedly ABA Acredited. He was allowed to be sworn into the NY Bar on motion for five years of practice in the Phillipines. This is why admission on motion is joke. True story. And they want admission on motion in Nevada.
In addition to barring any attorney from California, we need to stick to our current standards. In fact, tighten them up a bit. There has to be a way to let the lackluster Boyd graduates pass while similarly unsuitable out-of-town applicants are denied admission. We can do this.
The only reason Duterte would be interested in actually fighting corruption is because he might view it as competition.
Duterte is fighting corruption? jfc He's a murderer and a pig. He openly encourages extrajudicial killings of drug addicts. He's a petty tyrant and most certainly is NOT fighting corruption. He's the walking epitome of corruption.
Yes isn't Duterte the guy who would have his goons spray alleged drug dealers with bullets, and if an innocent child got in the way, well, the child was just collateral damage? Yes, that is the guy.