The Utah County Prosecutor’s Office hired former Eighth Judicial District Court Judge Doug Smith as a deputy county attorney last October 2019. Despite the rigorous hiring process, they only recently learned of the Nevada Supreme Court’s Sitton opinion that listed all the cases where they found Judge Smith failed to follow the law. They didn’t ask about it and, apparently, he didn’t bring it up. [Deseret News]
Today is the first day of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearings on Amy Comey Barrett. [SCOTUSblog]
Nevada’s eviction moratorium ends this week. [Las Vegas Sun]
Nevada stops COVID exposure reports for workplaces and hotels/casinos. [RJ]
For those of you looking for information on who to vote for in judicial races, here is a friendly reminder that the Nevada Independent and Boyd School of Law created a guide with a questionnaire that some of the candidates answered.
The lengthy interviews are interesting, but this is 2020, just tell me who is the budding Scalia versus RBG. I can take it from there. Any recommended lists? If not, I just use the Sun and vote the opposite of all their recommendations.
I'm not @10:59a but that's kind of how I do it as well. I look to see who the Sun and RJ agree on and that's usually the same one I prefer. Then if there is conflict I usually err on the side of anti-Sun.
Endorsements are not worth a damn. I am voting for someone who had the SUN endorsement the last time she ran, then she does not in this election. I look at their websites, and I ask attorneys I know who they are going to vote for.
Not every day you get an Angels in America based joke on this blog.
Guest
Anonymous
October 12, 2020 9:49 pm
Looking at the judicial contributions, I just picked a random candidate, Joanne Kishner. It looks like she added some personal money but marked them as loans. Is that common for a candidate to contribute "loans" to themselves? Why not put up straight (non-reimbursable) cash? Can a candidate repay themselves from the donations others make? If so, do they pay themselves back with interest (using other people's money)? Can anyone explain?
A candidate can loan the campaign personal $$ I think they have 30 days after the election to continue to raise $$ to "retire" debt including personal loans. Yes, they really can…..
Guest
Anonymous
October 12, 2020 9:51 pm
2:21–I'm not one of those who believe in reporting colleagues to the Bar, or reporting judges to the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission, except in instances which are truly outrageous and shocking. In my over 30 years of practice, I have never reported any colleague or judge.
However, had I experienced what you did, I would have reported them both as that satisfies my definition of truly outrageous and shocking.
You have a(presumably) important case, wherein you indicate the judge and attorney have an ex parte conversation wherein the judge indicates to the other attorney that,even before the judge hears any evidence or argument, that you lose and they win.
If it was really that factually straight forward and simple, I am shocked that you would accept that lying down. In fact, with something that clear and direct, and where there is no nuance and it is NOT reasonably subject to differing opinions or interpretations, you clearly had an obligation to report them both, whether you wanted to or not.
Ho can you actually live with yourself if you allow such a shockingly unethical obscenity to occur against your client and yourself?
I'm not trying to call you names or make you feel bad. I am instead suggesting that the situation may be a lot more involved and detailed than you suggest, but that you really streamlined the narrative to make it more dramatic for this anonymous blog.
But if there is clearly zero nuance, and it is very clear that such is the whole story(before the case begins the judge has an ex parte phone call with the other counsel to the effect that they will win and you will lose)I am stunned that you apparently took no action.
The point that the other attorney is or is not a Mormon is a distraction at best. Who cares what the opposing counsel's religion is? Whether or not he favors LDS attorneys is a much more involved, interpretative point.
I don't care if the opposing counsel belongs to a religion that advocates the handling of deadly serpents, or whether they believe that King Kong is God(Or P Diddy is God, or whatever). All that matters is this supposed ex parte conversation occurred where the case was thrown.
Exactly. My comment was in the Reply – but you expounded. I don't think I believe the post.
Guest
Anonymous
October 12, 2020 10:06 pm
2:51, I had the same initial reaction as you, but then when I thought of all the horror stories I have heard since the 80's, and some of them do seem to be as straight forwardly outrageous as what 2:21 recounts, I can think of equally hideous situations where opposing counsel never reported anybody.
I can think of a couple examples where something arguably as bad as this happened, but the aggrieved side was a new, or relatively new attorney, and they perceived that pursuing such matter could make their life very difficult
when representing clients in the court division the judge in question served in.
Guest
shockingly unethical obscenity
October 12, 2020 10:11 pm
Im calling BS 2:51.
I bet you report people to the state bar all the time.
Id also bet you double dip at parties.
Guest
Anonymous
October 12, 2020 10:35 pm
2:51. You can believe that, but I never reported anyone.
As far as double dipping at parties, well…
Now, I understand that I may have come across a bit like a sanctimonious hypocrite, but it's simply that I am shocked no one reported anyone for the incident described. It sounds well beyond the pale of what any lawyer should tolerate.
But, interesting that you spend time taking shots at me. Me and my shortcomings don't seem to be what should be focused on based on this incident. You don't wish to weigh in as to what occurred? Do you think it should, or should not, have been reported, and why?
2:51 here. The offense does not justify the Gulag. Instead it justifies 48 hours at the CCDC during a holiday weekend wherein there are like three dozen people in some of the cells.
On second thought, I'll take the Gulag
Guest
Anonymous
October 12, 2020 10:43 pm
Hey,2:51, 3:11 and 3:35,stop fighting.
It's bad enough when we have to discuss and argue about problematic judges when they are still on the bench. Once they are finally gone from the bench, and have been for a year of two, don't let their past conduct suck you guys into attacking each other.
If you must argue, can we focus on the shortcomings of judges who we still have to deal with? That could be highly relevant to our current and future practice.
As for that Utah District Attorney, I think he knew everything he wanted to know about former Judge Smith when he hired him, but now that this is a news story the Utah prosecutor feels he must act "Shocked! Shocked to learn that gambling is occurring on these premises!"
Guest
Anonymous
October 13, 2020 8:54 pm
There is no gambling at Bushwood sir and I never slice.
The lengthy interviews are interesting, but this is 2020, just tell me who is the budding Scalia versus RBG. I can take it from there. Any recommended lists? If not, I just use the Sun and vote the opposite of all their recommendations.
Here's the list I use:
I'm not @10:59a but that's kind of how I do it as well. I look to see who the Sun and RJ agree on and that's usually the same one I prefer. Then if there is conflict I usually err on the side of anti-Sun.
Endorsements are not worth a damn. I am voting for someone who had the SUN endorsement the last time she ran, then she does not in this election. I look at their websites, and I ask attorneys I know who they are going to vote for.
It's pretty easy to vote for most of the candidates the Culinary Union did NOT endorse.
4:14, agree.
Nevada Court of Appeals does not apply the law every day, so why should it be a big deal for Doug Smith.
Is Doug Smith a Mormon, like Joseph Smith?
Less like Joseph Smith and more like Ryan Gosling.
Judge Smith is a Man's man. That's not acceptable anymore.
Good on you Doug. Enjoy God's country and keep the vermin down.
Not every day you get an Angels in America based joke on this blog.
Looking at the judicial contributions, I just picked a random candidate, Joanne Kishner. It looks like she added some personal money but marked them as loans. Is that common for a candidate to contribute "loans" to themselves? Why not put up straight (non-reimbursable) cash? Can a candidate repay themselves from the donations others make? If so, do they pay themselves back with interest (using other people's money)? Can anyone explain?
A candidate can loan the campaign personal $$ I think they have 30 days after the election to continue to raise $$ to "retire" debt including personal loans. Yes, they really can…..
2:21–I'm not one of those who believe in reporting colleagues to the Bar, or reporting judges to the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission, except in instances which are truly outrageous and shocking. In my over 30 years of practice, I have never reported any colleague or judge.
However, had I experienced what you did, I would have reported them both as that satisfies my definition of truly outrageous and shocking.
You have a(presumably) important case, wherein you indicate the judge and attorney have an ex parte conversation wherein the judge indicates to the other attorney that,even before the judge hears any evidence or argument, that you lose and they win.
If it was really that factually straight forward and simple, I am shocked that you would accept that lying down. In fact, with something that clear and direct, and where there is no nuance and it is NOT reasonably subject to differing opinions or interpretations, you clearly had an obligation to report them both, whether you wanted to or not.
Ho can you actually live with yourself if you allow such a shockingly unethical obscenity to occur against your client and yourself?
I'm not trying to call you names or make you feel bad. I am instead suggesting that the situation may be a lot more involved and detailed than you suggest, but that you really streamlined the narrative to make it more dramatic for this anonymous blog.
But if there is clearly zero nuance, and it is very clear that such is the whole story(before the case begins the judge has an ex parte phone call with the other counsel to the effect that they will win and you will lose)I am stunned that you apparently took no action.
The point that the other attorney is or is not a Mormon is a distraction at best. Who cares what the opposing counsel's religion is? Whether or not he favors LDS attorneys is a much more involved, interpretative point.
I don't care if the opposing counsel belongs to a religion that advocates the handling of deadly serpents, or whether they believe that King Kong is God(Or P Diddy is God, or whatever). All that matters is this supposed ex parte conversation occurred where the case was thrown.
Exactly. My comment was in the Reply – but you expounded. I don't think I believe the post.
2:51, I had the same initial reaction as you, but then when I thought of all the horror stories I have heard since the 80's, and some of them do seem to be as straight forwardly outrageous as what 2:21 recounts, I can think of equally hideous situations where opposing counsel never reported anybody.
I can think of a couple examples where something arguably as bad as this happened, but the aggrieved side was a new, or relatively new attorney, and they perceived that pursuing such matter could make their life very difficult
when representing clients in the court division the judge in question served in.
Im calling BS 2:51.
I bet you report people to the state bar all the time.
Id also bet you double dip at parties.
2:51. You can believe that, but I never reported anyone.
As far as double dipping at parties, well…
Now, I understand that I may have come across a bit like a sanctimonious hypocrite, but it's simply that I am shocked no one reported anyone for the incident described. It sounds well beyond the pale of what any lawyer should tolerate.
But, interesting that you spend time taking shots at me. Me and my shortcomings don't seem to be what should be focused on based on this incident. You don't wish to weigh in as to what occurred? Do you think it should, or should not, have been reported, and why?
I can't believe anyone is disagreeing with you. You're correct. This is clear cut that's why I'm not sure I believe the story.
Sorry 2:51 have to disagree.
People that use the word "nuance" should be sent to the gulag
2:51 here. The offense does not justify the Gulag. Instead it justifies 48 hours at the CCDC during a holiday weekend wherein there are like three dozen people in some of the cells.
On second thought, I'll take the Gulag
Hey,2:51, 3:11 and 3:35,stop fighting.
It's bad enough when we have to discuss and argue about problematic judges when they are still on the bench. Once they are finally gone from the bench, and have been for a year of two, don't let their past conduct suck you guys into attacking each other.
If you must argue, can we focus on the shortcomings of judges who we still have to deal with? That could be highly relevant to our current and future practice.
As for that Utah District Attorney, I think he knew everything he wanted to know about former Judge Smith when he hired him, but now that this is a news story the Utah prosecutor feels he must act "Shocked! Shocked to learn that gambling is occurring on these premises!"
There is no gambling at Bushwood sir and I never slice.