Getting Paid

  • Law

  • Judge Jessica Peterson denies request to dismiss defamation suit against state GOP director. [TNI]
  • Stalking victims recount fear, legal difficulties. [RJ[
  • New booking photo taken of Henry Ruggs ahead of expected plea deal. [RJ]
  • What is being done to manage the migrant spike after Title 42 ends this week. [KTNV]
  • Congrats to the 53% of February bar exam takers who passed.
23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 5:05 pm

The 53% passage rate is likely misleading. Wonder what the breakdown is for first-time versus repeat takers? The Feb bar probably includes July takers who failed. All this to say, a 53% passage rate does not, by itself, indicate the NV bar exam is difficult. Those who think so probably also think they work at "biglaw" in NV.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 5:25 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Same as people that complain about how hard the CA bar exam is and cite the pass rate. Go look at the demographics of schools that feed into CA's bar – high failure rates from test takers that graduated from one of their (many) diploma-mill law schools. I also saw an article that CA has the most bar exam applicants that are English language learners (can't imagine that helps on a timed exam written entirely in English)… If you remove those statistically "high fail-rate" groups from the pool, the CA bar is no different than most other states.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 5:59 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

53% passage rate? Sounds brutal to me. I'm an older codger past 60 and when I passed the exam in the late 80's, the passage rate was like 79%.

Had the passage rate ben 53%, no way in Hell would I ever have passed.

Now, once Boyd was created, it was clear that in order to somewhat better control the influx of all these new potential attorneys, that the passage rate would decrease somewhat. But it's a little surprising to me just how much it decreased. I believe some recent exams may have had a passage rate less than 50%, but I could be wrong about that.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 7:41 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

10:59, thanks for proving my point. Boyd grads have something like a 80% passage rate on the bar. Meaning something else is driving down the passage rate.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 7:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

A similar issue qualifies the New York bar passage rate, which is historically a bit low. NY allows foreign lawyers to sit for the bar exam once they've completed a one-year American LLM program. I went to law school in New York and a lot of the LLM folks in my classes didn't speak English as a first language. I couldn't imagine sitting for a bar exam written in a language other than English.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 8:20 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The woman who sat at my table during the 2016 exam was taking the test for the sixth time. It would certainly be interesting to see some statistics that are controlled for first-time test takers. If its the same 35 people failing the test over and over it's not really indicative of the level of difficulty for the test.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 10:11 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Nevada passage rate is based on an algorithmic statistical model. A low passage rate is baked in, no matter what the raw scores are.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 11:31 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

3:11 is correct. I am against all cartelization schemes (whether disguised as some form of competency testing or not), but I do admit to benefiting from this system as I am a top percentile test taker and would pass anyways. Keep the riffraff out of Nevada. Let them malpractice law in New York or New Jersey.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 3:49 am
Reply to  Anonymous

4:31–Admission on motion. The UBE has changed the rules on admission with transferred scores on motion. Nevada must not ever get the UBE. New Jersey is a UBE state but only allows an attorney with a successful UBE score to waive in within three years.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 5:31 pm

The stalking story in the RJ is equal parts terrifying and infuriating. Way too many times I’ve seen judges gloss over DV in divorce and custody cases. Had a case where the home security cameras showed dad pick up mom and slam her into the wall. And that was just one of many incidents on camera. JuDge ruled That the fact that dad stopped beating her after she left him meant it was situational and he was given joint custody. Imagine doing weekly custody exchanges with someone who has beaten you repeatedly.

Oddly, it seems the more evidence and witnesses I bring in proving DV, the worse my clients do. A naked allegation with no evidence gets more traction than actual proof. Family court is a hell hole.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 8:26 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Family Court is a shit show for sure!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 1:53 am
Reply to  Anonymous

The judge in department Q once lectured my pro bono DV divorce client that she shouldn't have gone into the house to pick the kids up if she didn't want to get beaten up by her ex. The look on my client's face when he blamed her for her black eye will always stick with me.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 5:17 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I heard the problem is that since DV is used by everyone all the time, it's just not taken seriously. Cry wolf often enough and no one will respond when a real wolf appears.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 5:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I have heard the same thing 10:17.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 9:10 pm

Interesting fact pattern in a Washoe suit, that's germane to a discussion not long ago about respondeat superior and negligent hiring. Seems a John Doe hired a private I to investigate public officials. The PI put trackers on their cars, which they took offense to. They sued the PI, and a judge ruled the PI has to disclose who hired him. Doe filed MSJ, claiming he didn't direct the PI on how to conduct the investigation, and didn't authorize tracking devices. CV22-02015, https://www.scribd.com/document/643552213/Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-Version-1

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 11:20 pm

We have departments that have just become black holes for pleadings. Like motions go to their Chambers calendars to die.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 2:20 am
Reply to  Anonymous

@ 4:20
say what? examples?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 6:47 am
Reply to  Anonymous

What's the point of commenting if it is if no use to anyone? Name names or it doesn't count.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 3:32 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Or the opposite–one of the new judges is denying motions before replies are filed.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 4:12 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Whoa! First time I am hearing of that. Talk about an EDC pendulum swing.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 4:41 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I have had that happen also. One department in particular is doing that regularly.

One of the two discovery commissioners (Truman) is regularly vacating motions to compel where the non-responsive party is providing supplemental responses on the eve of the hearing and then the Commissioner is vacating the hearing and having the parties start over on a new 2.34 Conference over the supplemental responses. Incredibly frustrating because by vacating the hearing, there is no DCRR to even be able to take to the judge.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 8, 2023 11:32 pm

Build the wall.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
May 9, 2023 2:19 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Armed guards every 100 yds.