- Quickdraw McLaw
- 15 Comments
- 144 Views
A few years back, commenters were discussing the fact that some judges are off the bench quite a bit more than you might expect. Now, it’s become a yearly tradition for us to discuss this topic each December. So, are the judges generally spending enough time in the courtroom this year? Or should we say in BlueJeans? Which judges should be spending a little more time on the bench? Is there a minimum standard? Which judges would you commend for making the best use of your time? Which judges are always late and don’t respect your time? How has the pandemic affected the productivity of the judges you encounter? Are they showing up to BlueJeans on time? Are they ruling on the briefing instead of dealing with the hassle of a hearing? Which judge is the most adept at virtual hearings?
Did anyone else get a malfunction notice from efiling support?
Yes, they were having problems, probably because of the Amazon Web Services outage. It seems to be cleared up now.
It's(whether judges are working sufficiently a complex issue because if there are no hearings set for a given day, we really can't expect judge to be in the courtroom. But we should reasonably expect them to be in chambers working on decisions, reviewing cases, fashioning orders based on bench trials and evidentiary hearings, etc.
But now a lot of that can be done remotely as well(including the actual hearings), just like we attorneys are handling so many matters remotely. And with video hearings, it is far less of a problem for us if a judge is late, although it is still very important to be as timely as possible. But the days we appear at a hearing and wait for two hours because a judge is that behind, are hopefully quickly becoming a thing of the past.
So, I guess it's now not so much an issue whether the judges are physically on the premises, as long as they are getting the work done–same with attorneys.
The judges who were giving the taxpayers a sufficient bang for their buck pre-Covid and pre-blue jeans, seem to still be working reasonably hard, while the ones who were slackers pre-Covid and pre-blue jeans are still slackers.
So, I don't think it's so much that certain judges exploit the changes caused by covid and conversion to video hearings. I think it's much simpler and it comes down to work ethic and character. The lazy bastards remain lazy, entitled bastards, and the decent ones are still working an honest day.
One thing that the more lazy judges tend to do that needs to be focused on as a measuring yard as whether they are working sufficiently hard, and this remains the same whether pre-covid or post-covid or pre-video hearings or now in our video hearing era, is that some slacker judges vacate too many hearings based on some innocuous, technical defect that neither lawyer cares about as they both want the merits addressed, but the judges finds some excuse to issue a minute entry that the hearing is not ripe, whether it's because notice is off by one day, or whatever. Now that said, there are some hearings where notice to the other side is so defective, that matters should be vacated or re-scheduled.
Well, those are my two cents but I'm sure the other posters will have much better observations.
I pray I never need to idly sit waiting for Judge Delaney in her courtroom for 45-plus minutes again. It's almost as if she has zero respect for attorneys or their time. I don't know why she was perpetually late, but it surely comes across as being unprepared.
This is a profound problem. Judge Delaney is routinely 2.5 hour calendars and takes 60 days to get Court Minutes out. She is a really nice person. I do not want to make a judicial complaint but its getting that serious.
Its nothing new. She's been like that for YEARS!
I like her personally, and I think most of her rulings have been well-reasoned, but the timeliness thing is a big issue. I've had orders sitting for weeks. And she is always a minimum of 15 minutes late starting court. Sometimes more.
Hmm.. I have been in the hall between the court rooms and chambers many times on many floors (you don't need to know how or why). I always had the feeling that on any afternoon, you could shoot a canon down the hall and not wake anyone up. Extended lunches are routine. Many are out the door by 2 or 3 pm.
Maybe court room sharing is partly to blame, maybe not. Maybe remote appearances are the remedy, maybe not.
The common denominator is that they are elected officials with no direct oversight, except for ethics or just plain not showing up.
11:53–and as 11:45 suggests, now that we are in the Covid/video hearings era, the slacker judges will believe they have further justification for not being on premises.
I don't think the shitty work ethic is mainly created by the nature of the position, or the lack of oversight and lack of accountability, and thus what they feel they can get away with.
I think it goes back to what 11:45 said about the nature of the people themselves. Slacker judges will always be lazy and entitled, while the hard-working ones will usually remain that way.
So, I don't think it really comes down to the position itself being corrupting and encouraging sloth. I think it primarily comes down to who we decide to place on the bench.
And in this last election, with many seats up for grabs, and with Covid in full swing, no one took time to do a deep dive on these candidates–the public certainly did not, the media did not, and, generally speaking, we attorneys did not.
And 11:53 is right–some days you will be unable to find one of these folks past 3:00 in the afternoon. That was even a problem Pre-Covid.
Work in the Nevada Supreme Court building, Vegas, and you can shoot a cannon through the building. Scarce judges and justices.
Well aren't 5 of them based on Carson City? I guess that would make sense then.
https://nvhealthresponse.nv.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Directive-009-Revised.pdf
"SECTION 2: Any specific time limit set by state statute or regulation for the commencement of
any legal action is hereby tolled from the date of this Directive until 30 days from
the date the state of emergency declared on March 12, 2020 is terminated. "
I don't see any directive that terminates the state of emergency. That can't be right. When and how did the tolling on this end?
The tolling of the SOL ended on June 30, 2020 as part of Directive 26. Section 5 of Directive 26 states:
Directive 009 (Revised) shall terminate on June 30, 2020 at 11 :59 pm. All time tolled by Section 2 shall recommence effective July 31, 2020 at 11 :59 pm. All licenses and permits issued by the State of Nevada, Boards, Commissions, Agencies, or political subdivisions, that expired between March 12, 2020 and June 30, 2020 because reduced government operations due to the state of emergency made timely renewal of the license or permit impracticable or impossible, shall be deemed valid and expire on September 28, 2020 at 11 :59 pm. This provision shall not be construed to extend to any license within the scope of Directive 011.
Persons referenced in Section 4 of Directive 009 (Revised) subject to the provisions of NRS 76.130 and whose annual business license renewal fee was due between March 12, 2020 and July 31, 2020, shall be entitled to a grace period expiring on September 30, 2020 to pay the fee without suffering any of the consequences or penalties resulting from the application of subsections 4 and 5 of that statute.
https://gov.nv.gov/News/Emergency_Orders/2020/2020-06-29_-_COVID-19_Declaration_of_Emergency_Directive_026/
This is correct. There was a 122 day tolling of all SOL.
Where it gets murkier is with the five-year rule. Per the recent revision, it is tolled for any period of time that trials are not being held. So far, I have been lucky enough in a couple of cases to just get everyone to stipulate to an extension, rather than having to fight over this issue.