Governor Sisolak signed two criminal justice reform bills into law. [Las Vegas Sun]
As the session draws to a close, legislators are maneuvering to give themselves more flexibility with the budget. [TNI]
The Nevada Supreme Court overturned Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez’s decision to dismiss charges after prosecutors needed more time to call witnesses. (The case came up last year and there is video of the exchange between Jake Villani and Judge Gonzalez.) [RJ]
A man who tried to burn down a puppy store a few years back is now facing attempted murder charges. [8NewsNow]
One of you suggested that we talk about the senior judge program. Many cases are seeing senior judges while the newly elected judges are at judicial college. What do you think about the quality of senior judges? Is there a better solution?
They have some nice clerks in the Ninth Circuit. I enjoyed getting yelled at and spoken down to after calling all yesterday morning, trying to get a hold of someone. You make the RJC l9ok good.
It is the law clerk syndrome. Arrogant, smug, self-satisfied, yet they know absolutely nothing about practicing law. Good luck to them in the real world.
Are you talking law clerks or clerk clerks? The clerk clerks have always been very helpful to me. You shouldn't be talking to the law clerks under any circumstances, so while yelling is clearly not an acceptable reaction, I understand why they wanted you off the phone.
You think ninth circuit clerks are bad, try dealing with Debra Kempi, the Nevada District Court clerk. A lovely woman.
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 6:23 pm
Look
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 6:35 pm
There used to be court clerk (not even a law clerk) who worked for Harry Claiborne when he was a Federal Judge. I will not even mention her name. I still recall how verbally abusive she was to attorneys and to paralegals who would call her, asking for direction. You all know what happened to Harry, and she lost what she considered her lofty position in the legal community.
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 8:35 pm
So the moderators leave up the # nonsense and allow the comments to devolve into right wing conspiracy crap, but if someone posts honestly about a problematic sr judge, that gets removed? Way to ruin the blog.
I for one like to hear what my colleagues have to say about some of these judges. The insight can actually be useful.
@ 1:35
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see anything on today's blog about "right wing conspiracies". I think you have had too much coffee this afternoon. Easy on the double shot expresso.
@1:35 I'll explain it again for you. We simply can't provide a platform for anonymous posters to name call, grind axes, and/or make personal attacks. If you have something constructive to say about someone without insulting and/or arguably defaming them, please feel free, but if you can't handle those rules, then take your comments to your own platform.
1:35 here – I wasn't referring to today's comments, but you take a look back at the last week, you'll see what I'm referring to. I don't drink coffee.
And I still think it's lame. Maybe I missed something, but the comments I saw re a certain sr judge confirmed that what I've observed aren't a unique case and they can't really be defamatory if they're true.
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 8:39 pm
It's not my blog but there is no reason to "Twitter" people here i.e., remove them for their political views – just let everyone say their piece and users will filter them out. I'm no internet lawyer but it seems filtering would make a blog master a publisher while letting all speak would be more of a infrastructure thing, see Section 230 stuff. See I just proved I'm not an internet lawyer but maybe someone else can articulate my thoughts.
IDK about blog moderation policies. But moderation has no relation to section 230. It provides broad protection from lawsuits regardless of moderation status.
11:35 here…I was referring to 11:04's comments. I could really care less if someone what's to include hashtags, I was complaining more about an entire thread getting removed while dumb comments like 11:04 and the recent spate of right wing weirdness has been kept up.
Maybe I missed some of the comments which led to the thread getting removed, but what I saw didn't seem off base or defamatory. Especially considering the comments below re Craner and Gonzalez.
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 10:16 pm
I've been in front of Betsy numerous times including for a week long trial. She doesn't get overturned very often especially compared to some of the other judges. My guess is she doesn't follow the blog and doesn't care what the rest of us think. Which is why I like her as a judge. Fair but firm. I really don't understand all the people that post on here that she's so bad–especially not compared to the others. But even in a vacuum she's objectively a good judge.
I have appeared in front of her on a number of occasions, she is good, but she is also going to do what she thinks should happen in a case. Regardless of what the law says should happen. I have seen her reach very creative decisions, both for and against me, that were equally dubious legally speaking because it was clear she thought it was should happen.
G-force is a top notch judge. For those of you who missed this class in law school: the point of being a judge is to make tough decisions. And one of the perks is to split hairs in such a way as to reach a desired outcome. Easiest in equity, but sitting in law a good judge like G-force can do that just as well.
I worked for Betsy in the late 90s early 2000s. She was to this day, the hardest working attorney I ever knew. She made us associates long for some balance. But, I respected her demeanor and brains and work ethic, all of which persist to this day in her courtroom. She is nearly totally prepared and knows what she wants to do, but hears out the arguments and considers them.
If you're a dick, you'll be treated like one. She is very smart and again, the hardest working D.Ct. judge I ever appeared before in my 23 years.
Not to engage in pop-psychology, but I think a lot of attorneys don't like her precisely she is like a Clydesdale: immense (brain) power and endurance in spades. All the feeble horses and, yes, jackasses resent her. I for one love G-force and could sit in her courtroom all day. Win, lose, or draw, she's a real judge.
I respect you 12:07 and know who you are. And you are absolutely right. She could personally be prickly as a co-counsel/opposing counsel but she was prudent in how she tried her cases and she knew the law. One of the few judges that when she rules against me I have to stop and think "Wow maybe she is right." (The thought quickly goes away and I know that I am right but at least I do pause for a second). I also respect the hell out of her because she does not kowtow to Hardesty and knows what an a-hole he is.
Guest
Anonymous
May 26, 2021 10:18 pm
also, I had no idea there was a professional lacrosse league.
I recently heard a very credible rumor that the State Bar is paying the admission and giving a $1500 stipend to the presidents of all the smaller bar associations in Nevada to get them to show up at the bar convention. What is that, $2k per person? More evidence of smart spending by our bar.
I would be interested to hear Andrew come and defend exactly what he has done from the platform he ran on. Certainly have not seen anything other than glad handing pictures of Andrew on the rubber chicken circuit. But he should be able to address the evidence (or lack thereof).
There was nothing wrong with the Andrew Craner posts yesterday. I agree, he is a shitty board of governor. Want explanations as to why Andrew Craner has not fulfilled his promises to smalls and solo firms.
#freemoscowmitch
#freebonniebulla
#freebetseygonzalez
Why?
They have some nice clerks in the Ninth Circuit. I enjoyed getting yelled at and spoken down to after calling all yesterday morning, trying to get a hold of someone. You make the RJC l9ok good.
It is the law clerk syndrome. Arrogant, smug, self-satisfied, yet they know absolutely nothing about practicing law. Good luck to them in the real world.
Are you talking law clerks or clerk clerks? The clerk clerks have always been very helpful to me. You shouldn't be talking to the law clerks under any circumstances, so while yelling is clearly not an acceptable reaction, I understand why they wanted you off the phone.
Clerks, clerks. No one has the right to yell or talk down to you. Gaslightimg is my new favorite.
You think ninth circuit clerks are bad, try dealing with Debra Kempi, the Nevada District Court clerk. A lovely woman.
Look
There used to be court clerk (not even a law clerk) who worked for Harry Claiborne when he was a Federal Judge. I will not even mention her name. I still recall how verbally abusive she was to attorneys and to paralegals who would call her, asking for direction. You all know what happened to Harry, and she lost what she considered her lofty position in the legal community.
So the moderators leave up the # nonsense and allow the comments to devolve into right wing conspiracy crap, but if someone posts honestly about a problematic sr judge, that gets removed? Way to ruin the blog.
I for one like to hear what my colleagues have to say about some of these judges. The insight can actually be useful.
@ 1:35
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see anything on today's blog about "right wing conspiracies". I think you have had too much coffee this afternoon. Easy on the double shot expresso.
@1:35 I'll explain it again for you. We simply can't provide a platform for anonymous posters to name call, grind axes, and/or make personal attacks. If you have something constructive to say about someone without insulting and/or arguably defaming them, please feel free, but if you can't handle those rules, then take your comments to your own platform.
1:35 here – I wasn't referring to today's comments, but you take a look back at the last week, you'll see what I'm referring to. I don't drink coffee.
And I still think it's lame. Maybe I missed something, but the comments I saw re a certain sr judge confirmed that what I've observed aren't a unique case and they can't really be defamatory if they're true.
It's not my blog but there is no reason to "Twitter" people here i.e., remove them for their political views – just let everyone say their piece and users will filter them out. I'm no internet lawyer but it seems filtering would make a blog master a publisher while letting all speak would be more of a infrastructure thing, see Section 230 stuff. See I just proved I'm not an internet lawyer but maybe someone else can articulate my thoughts.
IDK about blog moderation policies. But moderation has no relation to section 230. It provides broad protection from lawsuits regardless of moderation status.
So no posts with hashtag? Really? Bored much?
11:35 here…I was referring to 11:04's comments. I could really care less if someone what's to include hashtags, I was complaining more about an entire thread getting removed while dumb comments like 11:04 and the recent spate of right wing weirdness has been kept up.
Maybe I missed some of the comments which led to the thread getting removed, but what I saw didn't seem off base or defamatory. Especially considering the comments below re Craner and Gonzalez.
I've been in front of Betsy numerous times including for a week long trial. She doesn't get overturned very often especially compared to some of the other judges. My guess is she doesn't follow the blog and doesn't care what the rest of us think. Which is why I like her as a judge. Fair but firm. I really don't understand all the people that post on here that she's so bad–especially not compared to the others. But even in a vacuum she's objectively a good judge.
Pfft
Thank you, Betsy Goff Gozalez.
Kobra kai, Betsey Goff Gonzalez.
I have appeared in front of her on a number of occasions, she is good, but she is also going to do what she thinks should happen in a case. Regardless of what the law says should happen. I have seen her reach very creative decisions, both for and against me, that were equally dubious legally speaking because it was clear she thought it was should happen.
Re 4:11 PM – Amen bother/sister/cousin – I have flat out observed her ignore/reject an on point US S. Ct. decision.
Bonnie Bulla did that, too. She even ignored Nevada Supreme Court cases on a Coa opinion.
The Gonzalez story effectively leaves the Court with nothing more than direction to weigh the factors. Not a good look for the the District Attorney.
G-force is a top notch judge. For those of you who missed this class in law school: the point of being a judge is to make tough decisions. And one of the perks is to split hairs in such a way as to reach a desired outcome. Easiest in equity, but sitting in law a good judge like G-force can do that just as well.
I worked for Betsy in the late 90s early 2000s. She was to this day, the hardest working attorney I ever knew. She made us associates long for some balance. But, I respected her demeanor and brains and work ethic, all of which persist to this day in her courtroom. She is nearly totally prepared and knows what she wants to do, but hears out the arguments and considers them.
If you're a dick, you'll be treated like one. She is very smart and again, the hardest working D.Ct. judge I ever appeared before in my 23 years.
Not to engage in pop-psychology, but I think a lot of attorneys don't like her precisely she is like a Clydesdale: immense (brain) power and endurance in spades. All the feeble horses and, yes, jackasses resent her. I for one love G-force and could sit in her courtroom all day. Win, lose, or draw, she's a real judge.
I respect you 12:07 and know who you are. And you are absolutely right. She could personally be prickly as a co-counsel/opposing counsel but she was prudent in how she tried her cases and she knew the law. One of the few judges that when she rules against me I have to stop and think "Wow maybe she is right." (The thought quickly goes away and I know that I am right but at least I do pause for a second). I also respect the hell out of her because she does not kowtow to Hardesty and knows what an a-hole he is.
also, I had no idea there was a professional lacrosse league.
There are several. But it doesn't pay much. Most of the players either play in two different leagues or have an off season job to make it work. One (Paul Rabil) started making youtube training videos and there was an article marveling about how he was the first to find financial success in lacrosse. He now owns one of the leagues. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1588296-paul-rabil-becomes-lacrosses-first-million-dollar-man#:~:text=Paul%20Rabil%20of%20the%20Philadelphia%20Wings%20Becomes%20Lacrosse's%20First%20Million%20Dollar%20Man,-Jim%20Flannery%20Invalid&text=The%20world%20of%20professional%20lacrosse,signs%20that%20it%20is%20growing.
RE: the State Bar Convention in Coronado
I recently heard a very credible rumor that the State Bar is paying the admission and giving a $1500 stipend to the presidents of all the smaller bar associations in Nevada to get them to show up at the bar convention. What is that, $2k per person? More evidence of smart spending by our bar.
I would be interested to hear Andrew come and defend exactly what he has done from the platform he ran on. Certainly have not seen anything other than glad handing pictures of Andrew on the rubber chicken circuit. But he should be able to address the evidence (or lack thereof).
There was nothing wrong with the Andrew Craner posts yesterday. I agree, he is a shitty board of governor. Want explanations as to why Andrew Craner has not fulfilled his promises to smalls and solo firms.
excuse typos, i am pissed.
No, I won't excuse you. Go back and retype it. Also, stay off my lawn!!