- Quickdraw McLaw
- 75 Comments
- 162 Views
- How the RJ covered Jeff German’s murder. [RJ]
- Body cam footage shows arrest of Robert Telles in 2020. [8NewsNow]
- Not Nevada, but lawyer who exclaimed “gadzooks” at trial, delayed, but did not disrupt justice. [ABA Journal]
That gadzooks judge reminds me of pompom…power tripping back robe-itis. That attorney was frustrated and trying to put on his case and things got a little heated. There was no need to take it that far. This job sucks.
In some states they don't mess around. In Nevada, had that lawyer apologized, and had a pretty clean prior ethics record, I think he could have avoided a formal public reprimand, and any contempt either would have never taken place or would have been vacated. It just doesn't seem to merit all this mess. Gadzooks!?Really?
Now, I realize many bloggers here are not fans of our State Bar, and I certainly get that and am not in a position to debate the point too much. But, still, a lot of states just tend to be a lot harsher about these types of matters than Nevada.
And that being said, I realize a lot of critics of the Discipline wing of our Sate Bar, indicate it's not so much that they are universally harsh, but more to the point that the little guy, without much juice, receives harsher treatment than those of larger, successful, well-heeled firms.
Now, as to this incident, judges need to control their courtroom, but that does not mean they should lower themselves into the dispute, which essentially abdicates their judicial position when they become a fellow combatant on the same level.
There's certain behavior we see in t.v. legal dramas, that should not occur in real life. Example: Okay, counsel, the fine is $1,000. You want to keep talking, now it's $5,000. Well, you quit talking, but now I detect a sour expression, so now it's $10,000."
Now, I realize my example is a clear exaggeration of what occurred, but I still think it reflects the mentality of the dynamic in operation, and a different tack should have been taken. Any de-escalation method would have been far superior.
10:33-Agreed, but I can think of a few Nevada judges who might behave like the judge in the article, and keep upping the ante and ratcheting up the tense exchange, rather than applying the de-escalation methods you suggest.
The Judge did not know the meaning of the word Gadzooks (which is an exclamation of surprise, known to anyone who regularly read comic books in grade school). It occurred to me that the Judge took the word to be an intended offensive expression. Reading the article, the attorney was reprimanded for continuing to trying to make a record after the ruling, not for the uttered expression.
10:33, yeah, just let him "make a record" even if he already did a couple times. Letting him make the record for yet a second or third time would have taken a lot less time than this exchange, and far more importantly, would have avoided this entire mess which poisons the entire proceedings and possibly builds error right into the record.
In matters like this, unless the judge eventually recuses, the situation is so bad that the specter of actual or implied bias is a built-in argument that taints the proceedings throughout and even provides appellate fodder.
So, just let him vent for a minute or so and make his bloody "record" yet again.Unless, of course, this is someone who never would have shut the f***k up no matter how much rope the judge gave him.
Are you guys familiar with AITA on Reddit? I have one for the legal community here that a friend told me about. I'm going to sanitize as much as possible because I'm not looking to piss off anyone. We're wondering: Who is the asshole in this story?
The case involves a relatively straightforward contract dispute, low five figures. There's a little bit of argument regarding one point (an additional charge) but otherwise, the facts are undisputed. The defending attorney ("D") has been trying for more than a year to get it settled, even serving an OOJ for more than the entire disputed amount. The other side ("P") has refused to respond to any offers or make any of their own. D serves written discovery requests, RFAs and Interrogatories. P never responds. Two weeks after the deadline passes, D files an MSJ. The MSJ refers to the admitted RFAs but also explains how there's plenty of other evidence to show that this case is ripe. P immediately responds, admits that they received the RFAs but forgot to look at them, and then accuses D of being unprofessional by not contacting P before doing anything else. P specifically says that D should have provided "professional courtesy" to P, presumably by reaching out and asking if P ever intended to answer discovery. (D would definitely have agreed to an extension if asked, but there was no such request.)
What do you all think? Is D the asshole for not talking to P first? Would you ever offer a "professional courtesy" that no one asked for?
I had opposing counsel accuse me of being unprofessional because he missed the time to appeal by a week and I didn't remind him. Sorry, no, not unprofessional.
This sounds like someone who is prone to overplay their hand. Get out of their way and let them do it.
Rule says DEEMED ADMITTED. No room for any other considerations.
It's not D's job to do P's job for him. I don't think professional courtesies extend to offering something that hasn't been requested. If anything, maybe D had an obligation to do a 2.34 conference before filing, but I don't think that an MSJ qualifies as a discovery dispute.
You are correct.
No 2.34 req'd on late RFAs. DEEMED ADMITTED. MSJ appropriate vehicle. Judge has no discretion, IMO.
This is why I answer RFAs within a day or two of receipt. I never miss that deadline and LOVE when OC does. It's also why I frame several RFA's relative to claims.
e.g. "Admit that you breached the contract at issue by________."
"Admit that P's damages are greater than $_________."
It works.
filing MSJ because RFAs werent answered timely is a weak move. do your job…take depos, gather evidence, then file MSJ based on facts recovered. Not over technicality.
Technicalities are what wins cases. You're insane.
I am and have always been a procedure hound in my office and love nothing more than when lesser counsel misses a particular boat or makes a request / demand that the rules don't necessarily permit.
You think its weak. I disagree, because winning months earlier on a "technicality" and without a trial is the height of advocacy. But, I guess you would rather bill the shit out a file for hundreds of unnecessary hours, when you could have it won before the discovery deadline closes on a "technicality".
You have ID written all over you. Fuck off.
I'm guessing this AITA was written by the D attorney. Sounds like P attorney committed malpractice, but I probably would've followed up by email before filing the MSJ to cover my bases.
@12:52, I've only ever seen the court throw out those "admit you lose the case" RFAs as abusive, but it sounds like you've been more successful than me.
1252 here. I have been successful 3x (in >20 years) on RFA's deemed admitted. But only as to liability. I have yet to get it granted on damages.
1 of the three settled after SJ on liability granted.
1 of the three tried on damages only.
1 of the three ended in BK filing after SJ granted on liability.
The point is, don't discount victories on procedure only. To me they are sweeter even than battling it out to victory in front of a jury. Maybe because it validates that my client hired a smarter attorney than their opponent did.
I find joy in this profession where I can and being smarter than the other guy / gal as as sweet as it gets to me.
Case law from a few years ago says you can’t use admissions that go unanswered if it is done in bad faith. Case dealt with counsel being withdrawn. It is plaintiffs fault. He can find a motion to file late answers. Judge has discretion.
RFAs are deened admitted if not answered, but a discovery motion will likely get them unadmitted, especially if early in the case. Everyone saying file an MSJ right after the deemed admissions sounds like newbies. And good luck trying to win on a technicality then having to explain to your client why you wasted their money over nothing.
I have also had a lot of success having MSJs granted using RFAs. Usually pro se Plaintiffs though.
@701
Clearly, filing an MSJ on day 31 is pound foolish. But, once the Answer to ROGS and RPDS are late and you proceed with 2.34 and a Disco Motion on that basis, I have been successful with filing contemporaneously (usually a couple of days after the Discovery Motion) a MSJ (kind of a 1-2 punch).
Especially if, when communicating with OC, you can obtain a tacit admission that the answers are late and they are requesting an extension.
It has worked for me on more than one occasion.
Telles:"You guys just want to take me down because I'm an elected official."
No one ever bothered to mention to him that although the functions of his office are important, it's an office the public knows little or nothing about, and they could not identify who is currently running it, and that Telles(until this series of events started occurring which resulted in the tragedy) had virtually no name recognition with the general public.
He acted like his life was destroyed once he lost this political title that almost no one knew about. He could have easily returned to private practice and done well, work on his domestic situation, and if he still had the political bug he could have run for something else in a few years(or even run to reclaim the office he lost).
At any rate, he was by no means consigned to disgrace and poverty, and could have simply done what many lawyers do who earn, and then lose, public office-return to practice and do quite well.
He apparently grossly over-estimated what occurred to him–it was far from a life and career threatening blow. I get that it is very difficult to endure a period wherein there is news coverage(true, partly true, or otherwise) accusing one of an office affair with a subordinate employee, and being a bad manager, etc. But, when entering politics, one must have thick skin, and realize the media will pounce on them for transgressions, and even sometimes attack them for matters which are not really true.
The combination of lacking any real sense of proportion, and grossly over estimating his own importance, and falsely assuming his career and life were unsalvageable, were apparently some of the matters he was stewing with and which helped lead him down such a horrible road.
all true 11:15
But ya gotta admit; stabbing German to death was a based Alpha move.
(Prob learned it at Boyd!)
What's a "based Alpha"? Was that a typo or is there a new kinda alpha I'm just hearing about? Also, if you have to tell people you're an alpha, you're not.
11:15, agreed. I won't go into detail but I took some real hard knocks in life and lost some things which were very valuable to me. But my law license was never really in peril, and looking back more than 20 years later, I am startled about how at that time I acted like my whole career and reputation would never recover.
I was too close to it all to have that sense of proportion, and to realize I am not really all that important. I was so worried about losing a good reputation, but very few people even really had an opinion of my reputation one way or the other
Sounds to me like he is a textbook narcissist.
So Tudor Chirilla a Nevada attorney who works mostly in Reno has been arrested for allegedly stabbing a 19 year old woman 60 times in Hawaii in the early 1970's. I knew him when I worked for the
Nevada Supreme Court. What I recall most about him is the late Terry Marren, who worked in the governor's office at the time, used to refer to him as Four Door Chinchilla.
77 years old, wow. How'd they manage to finally get over what evidentiary hurdle that had been lingering and arrest him now? And did the woman die also?
Yes she died.
Our ability to analyze DNA is always improving. I imagine they had samples that were inconclusive before that they can read now. Or maybe they always had workable DNA and they finally able to find a match? Maybe a relative or he himself signed up for 23andme or something and they matched it that way. That is how they caught the green river killer.
Looks like his son gave them a sample. Don't know how they got on his trail in the first place.
https://apnews.com/article/arrests-nevada-homicide-hawaii-honolulu-b6b575605de9e7aacc31dd64b7cf5335
He was apparently not on anyone’s radar until a recent “tip,” fifty years after the fact. Did the son discover something? Did he say something to a friend or family member? How do you stab someone dozens of times and then maintain and apparently clean record for half a century? I want to see how this one unfolds.
Like Telles, as Tudor Chirilla was about to be arrested he tried to commit suicide. What's with attorneys stabbing people to death?
I don't think Telles tried to commit suicide. I think his superficial wounds on his arms were to cover/explain the scratches German gave him while collecting DNA under his fingernails.
Interesting
8:06, your theory makes no sense. If German had Telles' DNA under his fingernails, as in your theory, what's the point of inflecting surface wounds to cover up the scratches? Unless you believe after Telles killed German that he then cleaned German's fingernails?
@7:04 I have to say I've had the same thought as 8:06 that you say doesn't make sense. If Telles had scratches on his forearms, why wouldn't he think "Hmm, maybe I could make those scratches look like I was cutting myself. I'm going to slice up my arm a bit to hide these scratches." That thought process makes as much sense as cutting up a straw hat and shoes and then leaving the cut up pieces still in the house. Maybe he was just focused on the scratches on his arms and trying to hide that and didn't even process the idea that his DNA would be under German's fingernails. 8:06's theory makes more sense to me than the idea that he just randomly sliced at his arm in what sounds like fairly superficial wounds.
DNA will be the enemy of both attorneys.
https://www.8newsnow.com/investigators/im-somebody-who-has-made-mistakes-clark-countelected-official-accused-of-journalists-murder-says-from-jail/
Maybe he shouldn't have given this interview
https://twitter.com/reviewjournal/status/1570875888715145218
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMIxnWJ_wUc.
You know what is really weird to me – Telles had that same kind of forced frown face that Amber Heard had – like they were trying to look sincere – I'm no body language expert (or I'd be down playing poker) but he just seemed like he is lying to me from his mannerisms. Not that I would convict on that but it seems so obvious he is lying.
Exactly. Like: "You mad bro?"
He's giving me Roxie Hart vibes (from the musical "Chicago"). Like, the fact that his interviewing about the domestic violence thing while in jail on a murder charge seems a little thirsty.
2:28, you wouldn't convict someone you thought was lying? Jurors judge credibility.
I'm sick of the news, I'm sick of the law, I'm sick of working, I'm going to a strip club and watch me some boobies 🙂
Which one do you recommend for a Friday afternoon? (I'm sure the recommendations are different for late night.)
Actually the only one I know that opens in afternoon is Little Darlings, I think the others open later at night, because it is all nude you don't get the best looking but there are other things to see 🙂
I never went, but about 10 years ago I remember some colleagues doing lunch at one of the Crazy Horses. Not sure if it still open or if it's any good.
While you are at Little Darlings, get me a t-shirt. My wife won't let me go. Thanks..
I would work the tables at not so little darlins over being in this profession. At least it is an honest living.
Telles' telephone interview to the RJ from jail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMIxnWJ_wUc
https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/document/view.do?csNameID=62218&csIID=62218&deLinkID=872330&onBaseDocumentNumber=22-28925
MUELLER VS. HINDS C/W 84077
Go figure – Mueller was difficult in his divorce and increased litigation costs and didn’t do what he was supposed to do.
Mueller agreed to pay his wife $450,000 within 90 days and years went by and he paid her nothing. Why would she be upset?
Wait?mueller has money?
Mueller lost his divorce in Family Court and then lost even bigger on appeal.
Mueller was not just difficult, he was impossible!!!!
#freemueller
#freebonniebulla
#freeferrisbueller
There is a new Florida case against Craig Mueller. He has a 78 foot yacht that leaked oil and polluted a marina. The clean up costs were $95,000. Florida court said Mueller responsible for the cleanup costs. Has to reimburse an insurance company.
Mueller has no
Insurance to cover the $95,000.
Mueller is having a bad day on this blog
Yes Mueller is having a bad day. His wife left, he was ordered to pay her $450,000 cash and then his yacht polluted a marina.
Mueller ran for Attorney General lost, and then during Covid filed numerous lawsuits against masks and other safety precautions. Then after Trump lost, Mueller filed lawsuits on behalf of Nevada losing candidates who were making the same baseless Trump claims concerning voter fraud and faulty voting machines. In the meantime he refused to comply with the terms of his own divorce decree. My heart is not bleeding for him.
I thought it wad his boyish good locks? How did he end up with Hines?
Was
What side was willick on? I always liked marshal with one L – inside joke for those of us who worked for him (truly he is a nice guy) full of himself ohhhhhh yesss but still a really nice guy
He represented the same one.
hahaha that's great – that would be pretty weird if one could switch sides
I go to Fox News website and msnbc website to just see the different headlines and I noticed that Fox News and the RJ keep making a big deal out of Telles being a democrat. I get news is not balanced anymore, but does it really matter if he was a Democrat, Republican or any other party as I think everyone can agree the party affiliation has nothing to do with whether he is a murderer or not.
Pandering to the audience. Which is exactly the same as MSNBC not mentioning at all that he is a Democrat.
Spoiler Alert!
The mainstream media (whatever their stripe) cannot be trusted. We are way beyond fair and balanced claims we know to be false.
Why does it matter the political affiliation. I would say it also doesn’t matter the political affiliation of those who invaded the capital. I just saw an article that one was a democrat, but again. Who cares if they are a republican or democrat. They are a criminal.
8:57 AM,
Completely agree. But, the people in these partisan cults see things much differently. This is not merely a battle of ideas, but of good versus evil. That the enemy has an accused murderer in their ranks is just further proof that the enemy, as a whole, is evil and must be defeated. The failure of some outlets to report that the accused murderer is a Democrat is just further proof that the media protects the evil opposition.
The same analysis applies to the new Anti-MAGA propaganda.
Because a couple hundred "mostly peaceful" protesters (out of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, that went to DC on January 6, 2021) entered the capital (many on invitation) and a few caused damage and injury, all MAGA bad/evil.
Law Dawg, are you there?
Wow. Tattle-tale much?
Seems pretty even keeled to me. Respectful and pointing out faults in both "partisan cults". Seems like both points are basically objective.
My takeaway is the original point of the comments. Political affiliation is no an excuse to behave badly or commit crimes and the media are active participants in this fact.
Exactly what is your beef here @940?