Ex-assemblyman Alexander Assefa, being represented by Damian Sheets, was indicted on felony counts of theft and lying about residency. [RJ]
Supreme Court of Nevada ruled that Judge Adriana Escobar lacked jurisdictional standing when she ruled state gaming regulators couldn’t hold Steve Wynn accountable. [TNI]
DA Steve Wolfson “gone, but not forgotten” at DA candidate forum. [Nevada Current]
Today is the last day to submit your nominating petitions for the Board of Governors. [nvbar]
Details on our first ever Las Vegas Law Blog Masquerade Happy Hour are here.
You got me. I thought we were going to have a virtual happy hour and finally get to talk smack to our hearts' content. Well played.
Guest
Anonymous
April 1, 2022 6:02 pm
I went to law school with Damian – nice guy
Guest
Anonymous
April 1, 2022 6:10 pm
I thought the Masquerade was meant to see which posters are masquerading as lawyers but really are not.
Guest
Anonymous
April 1, 2022 6:16 pm
This is Gossip Blog so I drop gossip. We got called by one of our medical providers who was cackling. The medical practice was contacted by a sitting judge who was rude and indicated that this medical practice needed to "get their head out of their ass" and hurry up and compromise on some medical liens. They asked if this is normal that a judge would be trying to compromise medical liens and if they should cut a bigger deal because this person is now a judge. Turns out that this sitting judge still has client money in a client trust account and never disbursed the monies to clients or paid medical liens before taking the bench. Stay tuned.
Wow. Sounds like it's a newly elected judge trying to wrap up loose ends from when they were in private practice. Is that accurate?
Guest
NewlyMintedAttorney
April 1, 2022 6:19 pm
I'm sitting here imagining a Zoom call in which every name is anonymous, every camera is off, every voice is distorted, every zoom login is faked or attached to a brand-new google voice number, but dammit, everyone is drinking. That makes me giggle more than it should.
Happy April 1st, or, as its known in the ID world, Get Your Damn Billing In Day.
A friend sent me this. I Googled this Alex Ghibbaudo (sp) guy and he has a crazy history. All facts so please don't remove my post. Suspended 5 years, reprimanded recently, other lawyers had to get TPOs, and now this. My friend sent me a screenshot of him threatening those guys that watch the Courts. I'll post it soon. This is not an April Fool's joke. How does he get by with this stuff. I've only been barred for 6 years but I forgot to send a decree one time and got a Letter of Caution. WTF am I doing wrong?
Honest answer– you are not violating enough rules. There are so many complaints against Alex and he is such a PitA that no one (not the State Bar or Family Court judges) wants to deal with him. They honestly would rather just kick the can down the road and hope someone or something else will ultimately catch up to him. We took on some former clients of his who were badly mistreated. My firm filed a bar complaint against him like 6 years ago and the State Bar laughed at us and said that they would just throw the complaint in their very thick file about Alex.
Why was my comment deleted? This is so stupid. Alex's ex wife is literally a former stripper. That is true. Go read about her in his RJ article. At his reinstatement hearing w the Bar she testified about her addiction and rehab and how she used to call the cops every time she got mad at him, claiming DV when it wasn't true. This is HER OWN TESTIMONY. And it's a sealed case. And she signed a contract saying the case would be kept confidential and she's being sued for violating that contract as well as her defamatory claims about him. Look up the cases.
He who shall not be named, the ex, and their weird group of friends are clearly trolling this blog posting that stupid link. Y'all know he makes money every time you watch his youtube videos, right?
And yes, Alex has some bar complaints for his ex's former attorneys. And probably her current attorneys. So what? I know several attorneys who went thru nasty divorces and their exes and their ex's attorneys filed bar complaints against them. Shocking.
If you actually read my comment and paid attention to the video, you'd see that the videos are all from the sealed case. Alex's ex has released a ton of videos from their case that is sealed. That is part of the reason she's being sued.
You definitely are exactly who I know you are. I have no doubt that the ex is a piece of work; however the video is a good snapshot of exactly the contempt and impunity with which Alex and you operate.
PS: The video above is from a child support enforcement hearing (an "R" case). Those are not sealed and are not subject to NRS 125.110.
Everything about family law is an embarrassment. The way the attorneys and judges act. The weirdo groupies that follow cases and post about them online. It all feels like middle school drama, cloaked in the faux dignity of the justice system. Family law is a cesspool of petty losers.
Wolfson not appearing at that D.A.'s candidate forum, that Ozzie and the other candidate attended, is not surprising, and is presumably by design, as opposed to a scheduling conflict, etc.
Wolfson's internal polling probably reflects a sizeable lead, and he and his team may not wish to risk that he would say anything ill-advised that could be used against him, or anything that could be seriously misconstrued.
So, the benefit to him,in attending a forum that few will watch, is negligible, but the risk of attending could be significant, as Ozzie, at times, has the ability and skill to goad people into saying something that does not benefit them. And if that happened, the media coverage as to the ill-advised remark would become quite broad-based, even if the initial forum had few viewers.
And with Wolfson's huge war chest, name-recognition,endorsements and county-wide support, his lead may well remain large, even though it can be expected to dwindle as the election gets closer in and attacks and issues start sticking to a degree.
Now if it ever dwindles to a single digit lead, or gets precariously close to narrowing to a single digit lead, you could then expect the incumbent to NOT sit out these types of forums.
Guest
Anonymous
April 1, 2022 7:14 pm
12:11-he referenced provocations from other candidates, as opposed to a standard type of scheduling conflict. The forum organizers agreed to beef up security, but the invitation to attend was still rejected.
But yes, I agree that if the race starts getting reasonably close, these types of invites would probably not be rejected.
Guest
Anonymous
April 1, 2022 9:04 pm
12:11 — Right on the money. Why would Wolfson want to get caught up in a Fumo insult fest? Calling a sitting Supreme Court Justice a White Supremacist, accusing him of being a convicted felon for minor shoplifting when he was a teenager. Love Ozzie's abolish the death penalty stance, but he got his ass kicked by Herndon, and Wolfson is going to do the same. Maybe you should've tried for Governor, Oz, or maybe Treasurer?
Guest
Anonymous
April 2, 2022 12:43 am
12:14 here–I meant provocations from the "public", not from the other "candidates."
But the organizers apparently arranged to beef up security.
I agree with 12:11 that the absence from the event may have less to do with security concerns than it has to do with an incumbent with a seemingly
insurmountable lead not wanting to take a chance by attending an event against a challenger who never hesitates to really aggressively take to task the incumbent.
The incumbent has nothing to gain by getting down in the muck for a mud wrestling excursion, but could have much to lose in doing so as he could get sucked into a debate designed to get him to lose his cool, lose focus, and say something that could damage his campaign.
Of course I'm just guessing, as it may well be that the security concern may have been the sole cause of not attending. But I agree with the posters who suggest an additional motivation may possibly be that since he appears to have a very large lead, why give Ozzie(who can mix it up with the best of them) a crack at him in a public forum.
Now that all said, although Ozzie has the talent, as a poster suggested, to goad an opponent, and make them lose their cool and make ill-advised statements, his last two opponents have proven to be tough nuts to crack in that regard.
Both Herndon and Wolfson, whatever one may think of them and their performance in their current positions, are polished and adroit as politicians and will not shoot themselves in the foot.
They both are the type to avoid getting sucked into the vortex. If an opponent makes a really negative or controversial allegation against them, they don't get defensive and start justifying and explaining. They either ignore the remark or comment that it is sad their opponent is resorting to such desperate tactics.
Lombardo is also effective in this regard.
Guest
Anonymous
April 2, 2022 4:29 pm
So here is my question– prompted by the judicial scenario above. Would you sue another lawyer who clearly has mucked up and committed malpractice? Would you sue a judge who as set forth above clearly has failed his clients when he was in private practice? I know we have this perception of the veil of silence and that we protect each other. Not sure I could sue another lawyer/judge.
lol
You got me. I thought we were going to have a virtual happy hour and finally get to talk smack to our hearts' content. Well played.
I went to law school with Damian – nice guy
I thought the Masquerade was meant to see which posters are masquerading as lawyers but really are not.
This is Gossip Blog so I drop gossip. We got called by one of our medical providers who was cackling. The medical practice was contacted by a sitting judge who was rude and indicated that this medical practice needed to "get their head out of their ass" and hurry up and compromise on some medical liens. They asked if this is normal that a judge would be trying to compromise medical liens and if they should cut a bigger deal because this person is now a judge. Turns out that this sitting judge still has client money in a client trust account and never disbursed the monies to clients or paid medical liens before taking the bench. Stay tuned.
April fools?
Not April Fools I am afraid.
Wow. Sounds like it's a newly elected judge trying to wrap up loose ends from when they were in private practice. Is that accurate?
I'm sitting here imagining a Zoom call in which every name is anonymous, every camera is off, every voice is distorted, every zoom login is faked or attached to a brand-new google voice number, but dammit, everyone is drinking. That makes me giggle more than it should.
Happy April 1st, or, as its known in the ID world, Get Your Damn Billing In Day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue8JhR5lJsQ
A friend sent me this. I Googled this Alex Ghibbaudo (sp) guy and he has a crazy history. All facts so please don't remove my post. Suspended 5 years, reprimanded recently, other lawyers had to get TPOs, and now this. My friend sent me a screenshot of him threatening those guys that watch the Courts. I'll post it soon. This is not an April Fool's joke. How does he get by with this stuff. I've only been barred for 6 years but I forgot to send a decree one time and got a Letter of Caution. WTF am I doing wrong?
Honest answer– you are not violating enough rules. There are so many complaints against Alex and he is such a PitA that no one (not the State Bar or Family Court judges) wants to deal with him. They honestly would rather just kick the can down the road and hope someone or something else will ultimately catch up to him. We took on some former clients of his who were badly mistreated. My firm filed a bar complaint against him like 6 years ago and the State Bar laughed at us and said that they would just throw the complaint in their very thick file about Alex.
Why was my comment deleted? This is so stupid. Alex's ex wife is literally a former stripper. That is true. Go read about her in his RJ article. At his reinstatement hearing w the Bar she testified about her addiction and rehab and how she used to call the cops every time she got mad at him, claiming DV when it wasn't true. This is HER OWN TESTIMONY. And it's a sealed case. And she signed a contract saying the case would be kept confidential and she's being sued for violating that contract as well as her defamatory claims about him. Look up the cases.
He who shall not be named, the ex, and their weird group of friends are clearly trolling this blog posting that stupid link. Y'all know he makes money every time you watch his youtube videos, right?
And yes, Alex has some bar complaints for his ex's former attorneys. And probably her current attorneys. So what? I know several attorneys who went thru nasty divorces and their exes and their ex's attorneys filed bar complaints against them. Shocking.
12:44– Your comment, content and tone (as well as inside information regarding a case that you claim is sealed) gives away your identity.
If you actually read my comment and paid attention to the video, you'd see that the videos are all from the sealed case. Alex's ex has released a ton of videos from their case that is sealed. That is part of the reason she's being sued.
I'm def not who you think I am, but keep trying.
Thanks Alex
You definitely are exactly who I know you are. I have no doubt that the ex is a piece of work; however the video is a good snapshot of exactly the contempt and impunity with which Alex and you operate.
PS: The video above is from a child support enforcement hearing (an "R" case). Those are not sealed and are not subject to NRS 125.110.
RIP headphone users on that video
Everything about family law is an embarrassment. The way the attorneys and judges act. The weirdo groupies that follow cases and post about them online. It all feels like middle school drama, cloaked in the faux dignity of the justice system. Family law is a cesspool of petty losers.
I've been a FL practitioner my entire career. 11:24 you understate the cesspoolnicity.
I echo 11:47's comment
Wolfson not appearing at that D.A.'s candidate forum, that Ozzie and the other candidate attended, is not surprising, and is presumably by design, as opposed to a scheduling conflict, etc.
Wolfson's internal polling probably reflects a sizeable lead, and he and his team may not wish to risk that he would say anything ill-advised that could be used against him, or anything that could be seriously misconstrued.
So, the benefit to him,in attending a forum that few will watch, is negligible, but the risk of attending could be significant, as Ozzie, at times, has the ability and skill to goad people into saying something that does not benefit them. And if that happened, the media coverage as to the ill-advised remark would become quite broad-based, even if the initial forum had few viewers.
And with Wolfson's huge war chest, name-recognition,endorsements and county-wide support, his lead may well remain large, even though it can be expected to dwindle as the election gets closer in and attacks and issues start sticking to a degree.
Now if it ever dwindles to a single digit lead, or gets precariously close to narrowing to a single digit lead, you could then expect the incumbent to NOT sit out these types of forums.
12:11-he referenced provocations from other candidates, as opposed to a standard type of scheduling conflict. The forum organizers agreed to beef up security, but the invitation to attend was still rejected.
But yes, I agree that if the race starts getting reasonably close, these types of invites would probably not be rejected.
12:11 — Right on the money. Why would Wolfson want to get caught up in a Fumo insult fest? Calling a sitting Supreme Court Justice a White Supremacist, accusing him of being a convicted felon for minor shoplifting when he was a teenager. Love Ozzie's abolish the death penalty stance, but he got his ass kicked by Herndon, and Wolfson is going to do the same. Maybe you should've tried for Governor, Oz, or maybe Treasurer?
12:14 here–I meant provocations from the "public", not from the other "candidates."
But the organizers apparently arranged to beef up security.
I agree with 12:11 that the absence from the event may have less to do with security concerns than it has to do with an incumbent with a seemingly
insurmountable lead not wanting to take a chance by attending an event against a challenger who never hesitates to really aggressively take to task the incumbent.
The incumbent has nothing to gain by getting down in the muck for a mud wrestling excursion, but could have much to lose in doing so as he could get sucked into a debate designed to get him to lose his cool, lose focus, and say something that could damage his campaign.
Of course I'm just guessing, as it may well be that the security concern may have been the sole cause of not attending. But I agree with the posters who suggest an additional motivation may possibly be that since he appears to have a very large lead, why give Ozzie(who can mix it up with the best of them) a crack at him in a public forum.
Now that all said, although Ozzie has the talent, as a poster suggested, to goad an opponent, and make them lose their cool and make ill-advised statements, his last two opponents have proven to be tough nuts to crack in that regard.
Both Herndon and Wolfson, whatever one may think of them and their performance in their current positions, are polished and adroit as politicians and will not shoot themselves in the foot.
They both are the type to avoid getting sucked into the vortex. If an opponent makes a really negative or controversial allegation against them, they don't get defensive and start justifying and explaining. They either ignore the remark or comment that it is sad their opponent is resorting to such desperate tactics.
Lombardo is also effective in this regard.
So here is my question– prompted by the judicial scenario above. Would you sue another lawyer who clearly has mucked up and committed malpractice? Would you sue a judge who as set forth above clearly has failed his clients when he was in private practice? I know we have this perception of the veil of silence and that we protect each other. Not sure I could sue another lawyer/judge.