The sister of a murder victim was struck by a vehicle outside the RJC in what Metro believes was an intentional act. [Las Vegas Sun; RJ]
No more business lunches or happy hours at McCormick & Schmick’s–it was shuttered last weekend so Claimjumper can move in. [Las Vegas Sun]
In a press release yesterday, the Supreme Court announced that the full panel will hear oral argument at Boyd Law School on October 3, 2017, on the following three cases:
Independent Alcohol Distributors of Nevada, Inc.; and Palidin, LLC, vs. The State of Nevada Department of Taxation; and Nevada Tax Commission. The appeal seeks to determine who can be licensed to distribute recreational marijuana in Nevada. The Supreme Court placed an injunction on the distribution of recreational marijuana pending the outcome of the oral arguments. A decision will come later and will not be issued at the hearing.
State vs. Brown (Donald):The appeals seeks a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court instructing the District Court to vacate its order compelling an intrusive psychological evaluation of a child victim.
State vs. Baker (Jeffrey):This petition for a writ of mandamus challenges the District Court’s refusal to enter a witness’s testimony from a previous preliminary hearing as evidence in a second preliminary hearing. The witness was unavailable to testify in the second preliminary hearing, and the State asserts the defendant waived his right to cross-examine the witness
At the end of the oral arguments, attendees will have the opportunity to ask questions of the justices and attorneys about the process, the Supreme Court, and the justices themselves.
i am a Golden Knights season ticket holder, and I am very excited for tonight's game. It is a big turning point for Vegas, having its first official pro sports team play at home. I think everyone can support this team, since the stadium/arena was built with private funds. Im excited for the Raiders to come too, but for different reasons.
Can you say how much you paid for the season tickets? I tried finding some info online but it was pretty spotty. Also, is there a 3-5 years commitment required to get the seats?
8:41 here, They do offer partial season memberships, which would be a year or less depending on what you signed up for. this was the first time i ever bought season tickets of any sport, and was new to the system myself. I did the math wrong and thought it was way cheaper than it was. I have ended up paying $860/month since last year for the season tix, and its a 3 year term (for two tickets each game). Pricey for sure. But I got really good seats that are currently on sale for about $170 each for tonights game. So considering everything its not a bad deal overall, to get great close up seats in a brand new arena for an inaugural season of what hopefully is a good team that maybe sneaks into playoffs.
Don't get me wrong, I do not think they have a very good chance making playoffs their first year in the league, but anything is possible and we did get some good players, including one of the best goalies in the game. If we can sneak in as the last seed and play at least one round of playoff games that is a win for me, specially as a season ticket holder. I need to recoup some of my monies after all! lol
I really hope no one has any expectation for GKs to make the playoffs. It's not going to happen. And the team will need to grow a fanbase while they are terrible for a few years.
10:45 I take it you don't watch much NHL hockey. We have a 0% chance of making the playoffs. A successful season would finishing higher that AZ/CO/VAN in the western conference.
2:43 A successful season will be securing the top pick in next year's draft and hopefully finding a player or two on the current roster who are going to be worth holding onto for a few years. Being better than a few other garbage teams is meaningless.
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 3:43 pm
So would this be an appropriate time to ask the Justices what they are doing to address the backlog of cases which remain unresolved?
Just curious, what is the backlog? And are there any discrete breakdowns of that backlog? How many cases are awaiting briefing, how many are briefed and waiting on the oral argument / decide on the briefs order, how many have been argued and are awaiting decision, how many have been resolved through jurisdictional orders / settlement / dispositive orders / opinions?
I am not certain what the exact number of cases pending are other than anecdotally how many of our cases are languishing for years. A search of the C-Search system (after pulling out ADKTs) shows 2360 cases active presently. For example, the Court issued 14 decisions yesterday afternoon. Every single one is an Order Dismissing Appeal. It would seem if the Court believes that it is so backlogged that it would off-load the jurisdictional gatekeeping to the CoA or the Clerk.
9:17 there is a problem with time spent waiting for argument. I have cases where a notice was sent more than 6 months ago that it would be set and it hasn't been set yet. What can be happening while they sit like that?
Two of the appeals getting published opinions this week were filed in April 2014 and May 2015 respectively. That is simply too long to have appeals hanging out there.
The Orders Dismissing Appeal are largely rote regurgitations that (a) the Order is not substantively appealable or (b) claims remain pending in the Court below. They are decisions on the merits; however they are largely determinations of jurisdiction. They are less than one page once one removes the caption and provide no guidance for further matters.
The posted opinions will be available here by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2017. Please note that the most current public information regarding the Supreme Court cases is available through the court's public portal by using the links below.
65456 – High Noon HOA v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct.
67120 – Adelson v. Harris
67843 – Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo
67955 – Gordon v. Geiger
70098 – State, DOT v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct.
70157 – State Engineer v. Eureka County
The Nevada Supreme Court and Court of Appeals normally release ADVANCE OPINIONS only on Thursdays. The opinions for the week of September 25, 2017 will be released on Wednesday, September 27, 2017.
@10:03 – another question, do we know the average case age?
Age would seem to be an important indicator: for civil appeals, it takes 180 days for full briefing (120 to file opening briefs, 30 for response, and 30 for reply); assuming no stipulations to extend time.
Then take another 60 days for internal consideration, then 30 days to write an order or opinion, and I would assume that the average age should be around 9 months, give or take.
# of Cases Status
55 Bar Matters
243 Cases Docketed
12 Awaiting Record
825 Briefing in progress/reinstated
49 Briefing suspended
159 To Screening/Briefing completed
255 Submitted for Decision
8 En Banc consideration
3 Proceedings stayed
5 Referred to settlement program
42 Rehearing Denied/Filed
15 Temporary Remand
4 Remittur recalled/stayed
39 To be scheduled for oral argument
153 Settlement Notice Received
169 Disposition Filed
5 Transferred from Court of Appeals
293 Transferred to Court of Appeals
3 Writ Issued
From the 2016 Pending Caseload report, as of December 31, 2016, the Court started the year with 1459 cases, added 2533 during the year, and reinstated appeals for 666. Of those, they disposed of 1679 leaving a caseload of 1647 at the end of 2016. If there are actually ~ 1736 cases pending (after deducting those that have been transferred or have already been disposed of and are awaiting post-disposition proceedings) that's concerning. It means that little to no progress has been made.
I will leave it to the obviously more knowledgeable posters to discuss any backlog and/or whether a sufficient number of decisions are periodically issued.I really can't comment on all the numbers provided, and can't compare them to past years in order to judge efficiency and productivity.
But I will observe that we were assured that creation of the Court Of Appeals would result in the Supreme Court issuing decisions in a considerably more timely manner as a great deal of the backlog and pending matters would be transferred to the Court Of Appeals. Yet it does not seem that has really occurred.
We were also assured that the appeals that were re-routed by the SC to the COA would be handled in a lot more expeditious and economic manner than appeals were being handled at the time by the SC. But this has not turned out to be true because appellants never know in advance which of the two courts will be assigned the case, and all the traditional requirements and deadlines still need to be met, as they always have been. Since each step of the appellate process, and all the required filings, remain precisely the same as they were, no one saves any time or money. It does not even seem, anecdotally speaking, that the COA issues a decision quicker than if the case remained with the SC.
Additionally, the court was to essentially pay for itself(Supreme Court overflow funds, duplicative use of space and personnel, etc.) But I'm not persuaded this remains true, and I do think there is, or will be, a financial impact on Joe Q Tax Payer.
These are some of the reasons that some believe that we were sold a bill-of-goods, as to the creation of the COA.
This is 2:12/2:14…to answer some questions above…the 2003 case is a clerical error. Case # is 41546. Case status shows "awaiting record", but when you look at the details a remittitur has been issued. As for the age of the cases that have been submitted it is all over the place. 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017. I don't see a pattern.
I looked at the 2009 cases. One just rendered a decision this month and the other is pending to the US Supreme Court.
It is also important to note that there are approximately 95-100 case that have been consolidated with another case, so the total numbers are likely inflated by around 45-50 cases.
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 5:04 pm
Golden Knights will be great for LV. Not too sure about parking though- arrive early and drink late (until surge pricing ends).
I love the idea of Raiders coming to town. I'm hopeful this will eventually be close to revenue neutral for the region. It would have been nice to instead spend $600,000,000 on education, veterans and seniors instead.
Have a great day everyone!
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 7:14 pm
An additional $600M spent on education on first blush sounds great. However, considering the current state of affairs at CCSD and our higher education institutions, it would be more effective than simply flushing that same sum of money down the toilet. If and when they find ways to improve the systemic problems and drive the money down into the classrooms for the benefit of the kids rather than feeding the fat cat bloated system.. I say live within your means!
Before everyone starts bellyaching that the system is efficient and not bloated, read…
Totally agree with you. Another factor is the over compensation of teachers. Starting salaries for a primary grade teacher in Clark County is mid to upper 40's. That a high starting salary for a bachelors degree and 7 hour work days.
It may be considered high for a starting salary but there is a pretty low income ceiling. Also, any teacher that is working 7 hours a day is a crappy teacher. My kids' teachers are putting in at least ten hours a day. Teachers spend hours before school getting ready, and hours after school as well.
I'm not so sure about the contention of teachers being overpaid. I know several teachers well and am familiar with the added unpaid work they have to do on a regular basis (meetings, training, committees, communicating with parents, coaching students (clubs/teams), grading assignments, etc. Every one of them also regularly reach into their own pockets to purchase supplies for their classroom, decorate the room for their students, etc.
Unfortunately, way too many parents seem to think of the teachers as surrogate parents or childcare providers instead of educators. Those parents seem to think they have no responsibility in their child's education. I don't understand why they can't understand it is a partnership with the school with the parents working with their kids on homework, partnering with the teachers to eliminate behavior issues, etc.
I'm not saying that it's not possible that some may be overpaid, but until we resolve the other issues and see if the performance of the kids improve or not I have difficulties reaching that conclusion. If at the end of the day, if the other problems are resolved and performance doesn't improve than I would agree that as glorified child care providers that salary is overly generous.
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 8:05 pm
I don't think I will ever be able to support the Raiders for two reasons. (1) I'll never get over the $750M welfare check they received; (2) they have super trashy fans. I lived in NorCal and am very familiar. Not an activity I'll be taking my family to.
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 10:09 pm
Big things happening in the NCAA men's bball world today, with 10 arrests of assistant coaches and one Adidas executive. They are charged with a scheme to pay recruits and steer them towards Adidas after graduation. USC, Arizona, OK State and Auburn are named, with Louisville and South Carolina rumored to be next.
Guest
Anonymous
September 26, 2017 10:55 pm
So I have a random question for the law blog. A few years ago one of the local legal magazines (Nevada Lawyer, Communique?) had a special edition highlighting the interests and hobbies of lawyers outside of their lives as attorneys. It was interesting to see what some of our peers enjoy. I recall there being a race car driver, a bed and breakfast owner, a coach for a junior Olympic team. Call me crazy, but I found it fascinating to see what our peers enjoy in their spare time. Anyone remember that? Which magazine was it? Is it still done? If not I think it should be. We have some interesting cats in our company.
i am a Golden Knights season ticket holder, and I am very excited for tonight's game. It is a big turning point for Vegas, having its first official pro sports team play at home. I think everyone can support this team, since the stadium/arena was built with private funds. Im excited for the Raiders to come too, but for different reasons.
Can you say how much you paid for the season tickets? I tried finding some info online but it was pretty spotty. Also, is there a 3-5 years commitment required to get the seats?
8:41 here, They do offer partial season memberships, which would be a year or less depending on what you signed up for. this was the first time i ever bought season tickets of any sport, and was new to the system myself. I did the math wrong and thought it was way cheaper than it was. I have ended up paying $860/month since last year for the season tix, and its a 3 year term (for two tickets each game). Pricey for sure. But I got really good seats that are currently on sale for about $170 each for tonights game. So considering everything its not a bad deal overall, to get great close up seats in a brand new arena for an inaugural season of what hopefully is a good team that maybe sneaks into playoffs.
Love your enthusiasm 10:45. Think you might be drinking the Kool-Aid regarding playoffs this year. But I hope you are correct.
Don't get me wrong, I do not think they have a very good chance making playoffs their first year in the league, but anything is possible and we did get some good players, including one of the best goalies in the game. If we can sneak in as the last seed and play at least one round of playoff games that is a win for me, specially as a season ticket holder. I need to recoup some of my monies after all! lol
I really hope no one has any expectation for GKs to make the playoffs. It's not going to happen. And the team will need to grow a fanbase while they are terrible for a few years.
10:45 I take it you don't watch much NHL hockey. We have a 0% chance of making the playoffs. A successful season would finishing higher that AZ/CO/VAN in the western conference.
be patient.
So 8:41, am I doing the math right that your cost is roughly $125 per ticket per game? ($860 x 36 months / 123 home games / 2 tickets)
2:43 A successful season will be securing the top pick in next year's draft and hopefully finding a player or two on the current roster who are going to be worth holding onto for a few years. Being better than a few other garbage teams is meaningless.
So would this be an appropriate time to ask the Justices what they are doing to address the backlog of cases which remain unresolved?
Just curious, what is the backlog? And are there any discrete breakdowns of that backlog? How many cases are awaiting briefing, how many are briefed and waiting on the oral argument / decide on the briefs order, how many have been argued and are awaiting decision, how many have been resolved through jurisdictional orders / settlement / dispositive orders / opinions?
The NSC does have 6 opinions set for release this week.
I am not certain what the exact number of cases pending are other than anecdotally how many of our cases are languishing for years. A search of the C-Search system (after pulling out ADKTs) shows 2360 cases active presently. For example, the Court issued 14 decisions yesterday afternoon. Every single one is an Order Dismissing Appeal. It would seem if the Court believes that it is so backlogged that it would off-load the jurisdictional gatekeeping to the CoA or the Clerk.
@9:45– Where did you see forthcoming opinions for this week? (Or are you inside of the Court?)
9:17 there is a problem with time spent waiting for argument. I have cases where a notice was sent more than 6 months ago that it would be set and it hasn't been set yet. What can be happening while they sit like that?
Two of the appeals getting published opinions this week were filed in April 2014 and May 2015 respectively. That is simply too long to have appeals hanging out there.
Orders Dismissing Appeal are substantive decisions for the most part, not jurisdictional gatekeeping. It is the NSC's unpublished opinion.
The Orders Dismissing Appeal are largely rote regurgitations that (a) the Order is not substantively appealable or (b) claims remain pending in the Court below. They are decisions on the merits; however they are largely determinations of jurisdiction. They are less than one page once one removes the caption and provide no guidance for further matters.
https://nvcourts.gov/Supreme/Decisions/Forthcoming_Opinions/
The posted opinions will be available here by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2017. Please note that the most current public information regarding the Supreme Court cases is available through the court's public portal by using the links below.
65456 – High Noon HOA v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct.
67120 – Adelson v. Harris
67843 – Ford Motor Co. v. Trejo
67955 – Gordon v. Geiger
70098 – State, DOT v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct.
70157 – State Engineer v. Eureka County
The Nevada Supreme Court and Court of Appeals normally release ADVANCE OPINIONS only on Thursdays. The opinions for the week of September 25, 2017 will be released on Wednesday, September 27, 2017.
I forgot the Jewish Holiday is compelling the early release of this week's opinions.
@10:03 – another question, do we know the average case age?
Age would seem to be an important indicator: for civil appeals, it takes 180 days for full briefing (120 to file opening briefs, 30 for response, and 30 for reply); assuming no stipulations to extend time.
Then take another 60 days for internal consideration, then 30 days to write an order or opinion, and I would assume that the average age should be around 9 months, give or take.
Here are some rough numbers from C-Track:
# of Cases Status
55 Bar Matters
243 Cases Docketed
12 Awaiting Record
825 Briefing in progress/reinstated
49 Briefing suspended
159 To Screening/Briefing completed
255 Submitted for Decision
8 En Banc consideration
3 Proceedings stayed
5 Referred to settlement program
42 Rehearing Denied/Filed
15 Temporary Remand
4 Remittur recalled/stayed
39 To be scheduled for oral argument
153 Settlement Notice Received
169 Disposition Filed
5 Transferred from Court of Appeals
293 Transferred to Court of Appeals
3 Writ Issued
More Numbers:
Year Filed # cases in c-track
2003 1
2009 2
2011 1
2012 3
2013 6
2014 22
2015 121
2016 638
2017 1508
Just to estimate the numbers then, if there's roughly 2400 active cases:
47% (1,129) aren't ready to be decided (docket statement / in briefing / suspended).
Arguably 19% are fully briefed and awaiting consideration (461) (depending on how you count the To Screening / Briefing completed category).
About 16% (371) are in the post-disposition stages (motions & petitions for reconsideration / rehearing / etc.)
12% (293) are at the Court of Appeals.
Which puts about 6% in a miscellaneous category.
I'd be really interested to know the case age for those cases that are ready for decision.
And that 2003 case has to be a clerical error.
And thank you to 2:12 / 2:14 for taking the time to pull that info out.
From the 2016 Pending Caseload report, as of December 31, 2016, the Court started the year with 1459 cases, added 2533 during the year, and reinstated appeals for 666. Of those, they disposed of 1679 leaving a caseload of 1647 at the end of 2016. If there are actually ~ 1736 cases pending (after deducting those that have been transferred or have already been disposed of and are awaiting post-disposition proceedings) that's concerning. It means that little to no progress has been made.
That is horribly concerning and indicates a Court which is not taking pending matters seriously.
I will leave it to the obviously more knowledgeable posters to discuss any backlog and/or whether a sufficient number of decisions are periodically issued.I really can't comment on all the numbers provided, and can't compare them to past years in order to judge efficiency and productivity.
But I will observe that we were assured that creation of the Court Of Appeals would result in the Supreme Court issuing decisions in a considerably more timely manner as a great deal of the backlog and pending matters would be transferred to the Court Of Appeals. Yet it does not seem that has really occurred.
We were also assured that the appeals that were re-routed by the SC to the COA would be handled in a lot more expeditious and economic manner than appeals were being handled at the time by the SC. But this has not turned out to be true because appellants never know in advance which of the two courts will be assigned the case, and all the traditional requirements and deadlines still need to be met, as they always have been. Since each step of the appellate process, and all the required filings, remain precisely the same as they were, no one saves any time or money. It does not even seem, anecdotally speaking, that the COA issues a decision quicker than if the case remained with the SC.
Additionally, the court was to essentially pay for itself(Supreme Court overflow funds, duplicative use of space and personnel, etc.) But I'm not persuaded this remains true, and I do think there is, or will be, a financial impact on Joe Q Tax Payer.
These are some of the reasons that some believe that we were sold a bill-of-goods, as to the creation of the COA.
This is 2:12/2:14…to answer some questions above…the 2003 case is a clerical error. Case # is 41546. Case status shows "awaiting record", but when you look at the details a remittitur has been issued. As for the age of the cases that have been submitted it is all over the place. 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017. I don't see a pattern.
I looked at the 2009 cases. One just rendered a decision this month and the other is pending to the US Supreme Court.
It is also important to note that there are approximately 95-100 case that have been consolidated with another case, so the total numbers are likely inflated by around 45-50 cases.
Golden Knights will be great for LV. Not too sure about parking though- arrive early and drink late (until surge pricing ends).
I love the idea of Raiders coming to town. I'm hopeful this will eventually be close to revenue neutral for the region. It would have been nice to instead spend $600,000,000 on education, veterans and seniors instead.
Have a great day everyone!
An additional $600M spent on education on first blush sounds great. However, considering the current state of affairs at CCSD and our higher education institutions, it would be more effective than simply flushing that same sum of money down the toilet. If and when they find ways to improve the systemic problems and drive the money down into the classrooms for the benefit of the kids rather than feeding the fat cat bloated system.. I say live within your means!
Before everyone starts bellyaching that the system is efficient and not bloated, read…
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/education/ccsd-superintendent-in-for-big-payday-when-he-retires-next-year/
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/education/clark-county-schools-deficit-puzzles-sandoval-state-officials/
Totally agree with you. Another factor is the over compensation of teachers. Starting salaries for a primary grade teacher in Clark County is mid to upper 40's. That a high starting salary for a bachelors degree and 7 hour work days.
It may be considered high for a starting salary but there is a pretty low income ceiling. Also, any teacher that is working 7 hours a day is a crappy teacher. My kids' teachers are putting in at least ten hours a day. Teachers spend hours before school getting ready, and hours after school as well.
I'm not so sure about the contention of teachers being overpaid. I know several teachers well and am familiar with the added unpaid work they have to do on a regular basis (meetings, training, committees, communicating with parents, coaching students (clubs/teams), grading assignments, etc. Every one of them also regularly reach into their own pockets to purchase supplies for their classroom, decorate the room for their students, etc.
Unfortunately, way too many parents seem to think of the teachers as surrogate parents or childcare providers instead of educators. Those parents seem to think they have no responsibility in their child's education. I don't understand why they can't understand it is a partnership with the school with the parents working with their kids on homework, partnering with the teachers to eliminate behavior issues, etc.
I'm not saying that it's not possible that some may be overpaid, but until we resolve the other issues and see if the performance of the kids improve or not I have difficulties reaching that conclusion. If at the end of the day, if the other problems are resolved and performance doesn't improve than I would agree that as glorified child care providers that salary is overly generous.
I don't think I will ever be able to support the Raiders for two reasons. (1) I'll never get over the $750M welfare check they received; (2) they have super trashy fans. I lived in NorCal and am very familiar. Not an activity I'll be taking my family to.
Big things happening in the NCAA men's bball world today, with 10 arrests of assistant coaches and one Adidas executive. They are charged with a scheme to pay recruits and steer them towards Adidas after graduation. USC, Arizona, OK State and Auburn are named, with Louisville and South Carolina rumored to be next.
So I have a random question for the law blog. A few years ago one of the local legal magazines (Nevada Lawyer, Communique?) had a special edition highlighting the interests and hobbies of lawyers outside of their lives as attorneys. It was interesting to see what some of our peers enjoy. I recall there being a race car driver, a bed and breakfast owner, a coach for a junior Olympic team. Call me crazy, but I found it fascinating to see what our peers enjoy in their spare time. Anyone remember that? Which magazine was it? Is it still done? If not I think it should be. We have some interesting cats in our company.