Ah, the bar exam. I want to do it again just to relive that glorious time of mental and physical achievement. For a tiny sliver of time, I was a walking encyclopedia of the law! Ask me anything. UCC? No problem. Family law? No problem. Criminal procedure? No problem. Property law? No problem.
Guest
Anonymous
February 28, 2023 7:03 pm
That Rob Telles hearing was absolutely insane. Rob is the model of the Kruger Dunning effect. Judge Leavitt absolutely humiliated him.
Judge Leavitt: "If you were practicing in this area, like civil, you would have the rules of civil procedure pretty much memorized, right?" She thinks too highly of practicing attorneys in Nevada.
Rule 53 deals with appointment of Special Masters and their reports and recommendations. That's the only one I know off the top of my head without looking. I'll take a Diet Dr. Pepper.
Telles has the DA right where he wants them. If he represents himself, he can disregard the ethical rules governing attorneys and employ strategies the DA has never seen before to secure an acquittal. I doubt they have any idea of what they are facing. He’s playing hardball and won’t accept anything less than an acquittal and public exoneration. I also like his move of demanding an earlier trial.
4:09-I tend not to agree. Like you, I don't necessarily hold our D.A.'s Office in the highest of esteem at all times(an understatement).
But to indicate that they will be totally bewildered and rendered immobile and incompetent by a grandstander (even though he be an attorney) who quite unwisely decides to represent himself, is really a reach.
You seem committed to the idea that he will run rings around them and secure an acquittal.
I think you are failing to separate out two different concepts. The fact that you may dislike the leadership, and some political dynamics, within our D.A.'s Office, in no way means that they are totally incompetent and clueless in homicide trials. I won't name them, but I believe there are several attorneys from that office who could do a fine job with this case.
I likewise feel that there are solid homicide attorneys at the P.D.'s office, and he should have stayed with them. That would make a lot more sense than him representing himself, particularly as I don't think you are right that he is some genius, evil mastermind who will manipulate the case into an acquittal, so that he can visit further havoc upon Gotham City by teaming up with the Joker, Riddler and Penguin..
4:09– Oh you slay me (but not in the same way that Telles slayed German).
Judge Leavitt is going to hold his feet to the fire and show him to be the novii regarding criminal law that he is. There is no hardball with Telles. Heck he never knew how to play hardball in civil court. The one point that I do agree with you on is his demand for an earlier trial when he will not be ready because it would support his desire for the trial to be a disorganized mess. I also do not hold the DA's Office in high esteem, but in this case they just have to be better than that guy who had no idea what he was talking about from the jury box today.
Well that says more about you 8:13 being humorless and not getting the joke than it does about any of the foregoing clever content by multiple contributors.
I will accept my peers in law With Arms Wide Open. Before I take my One Last Breath, I will do my best to make this profession a better one than I found it. That would be My Sacrifice to this profession.
I heard the EJDC judges were decided. Any word from anybody? I didn’t hear the names.
Guest
Anonymous
February 28, 2023 9:43 pm
Telles is shocking bad at simply being in court. He's confused and overwhelmed. If he actually represents himself at trial he'll get slaughtered
Guest
Anonymous
February 28, 2023 10:08 pm
Robert Telles just filed a handwritten, Motion to Compel Clark County Detention Center to Provide Lawful Housing and Legal Research Access [Docket #25]. C-22-368935-1
I don't get it. At least in Las Vegas if an attorney steals his client's money, he blows it on physical blow and hoes. Seeking carnal pleasure on a screen is just gross and incomprehensible to me. Then again, perhaps the available inventory of easy women in FL forced the poor guy to seek it online. Very sad.
Could have been much worse.
I question Chio's intellect taking on Joe. Guessing she gets voted out next run.
Guest
Anonymous
March 1, 2023 3:52 am
The Board of Governors is a joke. We've got attorneys and judges killing themselves left and right and they publish some 1st amendment infringing civility policy? Astoundingly the sad state of our collective mental health is not their concern, but whether or not we act like nice little robots is. This is just the beginning. They've gone through and laid the foundation for anything you say to be used as a basis for a bar complaint. Opposing counsel doesn't like you, they can file a bar complaint and allege that you called them names during a meet and confer. Someone overhears you drop an f-bomb in the elevator at the RJC, they can report you. Even if you prevail on the bar complaint, you're going to be out however many thousands of dollars you've got to pay Bare to represent you. OBC has no business regulating civility and they claim that's not what they do, but they absolutely are doing just that. Who wants to start the campaign to draft Dominic Gentile?
That "creed" was barely coherent and incredibly insulting. Things like "don't ask for continuances with no good reason" followed by "give people a continuance if they want to go to a conferences." While they gallivant to New York. They should be embarrassed. I once saw a member of the board of governors make fun of a crying, grieving witness behind their hand to their co-counsel during an evidentiary hearing. I noticed, the judge noticed. They for sure don't follow this haphazard "creed."
I asked ChatGPT to rewrite the "creed" for clarity. This is the result:
As lawyers, we uphold personal courtesy and professional integrity while fulfilling our duty to represent clients vigorously. We recognize the importance of the administration of justice, which is a truth-seeking process aimed at resolving human and societal problems in a rational, peaceful, and efficient manner. We remain committed to the rule of law as the foundation for a just and peaceful society.
We acknowledge that uncivil, abrasive, abusive, hostile, or obstructive conduct impedes the fundamental goal of resolving disputes rationally, peacefully, and efficiently. Therefore, we will exhibit courtesy, candor, and cooperation when participating in the legal system and dealing with the public, which are hallmarks of a learned profession dedicated to public service.
We understand that ethical problems arise from the conflict between a lawyer’s responsibilities to clients, to the legal system, and to the lawyer’s own interests. We recognize that the Rules of Professional Conduct resolve such conflicts, but they cannot address every conflict that may arise. Therefore, we have developed these voluntary standards to honor the spirit of the Rules and to balance a lawyer’s obligation to protect and pursue a client’s legitimate interests zealously, within the bounds of the law, while maintaining a professional, courteous, and civil attitude toward all persons in the legal system.
We expect lawyers to commit to the spirit and letter of these standards, and we encourage law schools and continuing legal education courses to incorporate them into their teaching of professionalism to law students and practicing lawyers. We also recommend that lawyers make copies of these standards available to clients and that adjudicators reinforce them in the courtroom.
CREED:
We will strive to find harmony in our responsibilities as a representative of clients, as officers of the legal system, and as public citizens.
We will treat all participants of the legal system in a civil and courteous manner, not only in court, but also in all other written and oral communications.
We will never permit zealous advocacy to carry us beyond sobriety and decorum to disparaging personal remarks or acrimony.
We will demonstrate civility, professional integrity, personal dignity, respect, courtesy, and cooperation because they are essential to the fair administration of justice and conflict resolution.
We will not encourage or knowingly authorize any person under our control to engage in uncivil conduct.
We will not attribute bad motives or improper conduct to other counsel without good cause or bring the profession into disrepute by unfounded accusations of impropriety.
We will avoid ex parte communications with the court or tribunal, including the judge’s staff, on pending matters, except when permitted by law.
We will adhere to promises and agreements fairly reached, whether orally or in writing, in good faith. When reiterating oral promises or agreements in writing, we will fairly, completely, and in good faith, restate all elements of the parties’ oral agreement.
We will confer early with other counsel to assess settlement possibilities. We will not falsely hold out the possibility of settlement to adjourn discovery or to delay trial.
We will stipulate to undisputed matters unless we have a good-faith basis not to stipulate.
We will try in good faith to resolve our objections with opposing counsel.
We will not time the filing or service of motions or pleadings in any way that unfairly limits another party’s opportunity to respond.
We will not request an extension of time without just cause.
We will consult other counsel regarding scheduling matters in a good-faith effort to avoid scheduling conflicts.
We will endeavor to accommodate previously scheduled dates for hearings, depositions, meetings, conferences, vacations, seminars, or other functions of other counsel.
We will explain to our clients that cooperation is the professional norm.
Translated: This creed is meant to help you practice without being an asshole. These standards – by themselves – aren't a basis for discipline, but some of these standards cover conduct that is by itself sanctionable. So even if this creed didn't exist, doing that shit can and should get you sanctioned.
Wheaton's Law. Learn it, follow it, teach it. We'll all be better off.
Ah, the bar exam. I want to do it again just to relive that glorious time of mental and physical achievement. For a tiny sliver of time, I was a walking encyclopedia of the law! Ask me anything. UCC? No problem. Family law? No problem. Criminal procedure? No problem. Property law? No problem.
That Rob Telles hearing was absolutely insane. Rob is the model of the Kruger Dunning effect. Judge Leavitt absolutely humiliated him.
post video when available
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/telles-appears-in-court-for-legal-representation-ruling-2736368/
Here's the full hearing video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w29XtX50URc
He is the definition of creepy. Like something out of a psychodrama movie.
Imagine being condescendingly taught the law by Michelle Leavitt
Judge Leavitt: "If you were practicing in this area, like civil, you would have the rules of civil procedure pretty much memorized, right?" She thinks too highly of practicing attorneys in Nevada.
Oof, this hearing was hard to watch, but I'll definitely be tuning in to this trial, he's so cocky this is going to go down spectacularly
@12:47 – yeah, sure, we all have the NRCP memorized, right?
(If someone knows what Rules 17, 27, 39, 48, and 53 are off the top of their head, I'll buy them a beverage of their choice.)
Rule 53 deals with appointment of Special Masters and their reports and recommendations. That's the only one I know off the top of my head without looking. I'll take a Diet Dr. Pepper.
Judge Leavitt handled Telles well. She is a great judge.
Telles rep'ing himself at trial will turn the trial into a circus which could be a strategy.
@2:38 PM. Judge Leavitt knows this. This isn't her first rodeo. She'll keep it clean and on track.
Telles has the DA right where he wants them. If he represents himself, he can disregard the ethical rules governing attorneys and employ strategies the DA has never seen before to secure an acquittal. I doubt they have any idea of what they are facing. He’s playing hardball and won’t accept anything less than an acquittal and public exoneration. I also like his move of demanding an earlier trial.
4:09-I tend not to agree. Like you, I don't necessarily hold our D.A.'s Office in the highest of esteem at all times(an understatement).
But to indicate that they will be totally bewildered and rendered immobile and incompetent by a grandstander (even though he be an attorney) who quite unwisely decides to represent himself, is really a reach.
You seem committed to the idea that he will run rings around them and secure an acquittal.
I think you are failing to separate out two different concepts. The fact that you may dislike the leadership, and some political dynamics, within our D.A.'s Office, in no way means that they are totally incompetent and clueless in homicide trials. I won't name them, but I believe there are several attorneys from that office who could do a fine job with this case.
I likewise feel that there are solid homicide attorneys at the P.D.'s office, and he should have stayed with them. That would make a lot more sense than him representing himself, particularly as I don't think you are right that he is some genius, evil mastermind who will manipulate the case into an acquittal, so that he can visit further havoc upon Gotham City by teaming up with the Joker, Riddler and Penguin..
4:09– Oh you slay me (but not in the same way that Telles slayed German).
Judge Leavitt is going to hold his feet to the fire and show him to be the novii regarding criminal law that he is. There is no hardball with Telles. Heck he never knew how to play hardball in civil court. The one point that I do agree with you on is his demand for an earlier trial when he will not be ready because it would support his desire for the trial to be a disorganized mess. I also do not hold the DA's Office in high esteem, but in this case they just have to be better than that guy who had no idea what he was talking about from the jury box today.
4:09 is an obvious troll, who has made that comment previously. Hilarious that 4:37 and 4:57 took the comment seriously.
This is 4:57. I did not take the comment seriously. Hence the "slay" pun meaning to make one laugh.
If 409 is not in fact a troll, he is suffering from the same Kruger Dunning Effect as Telles, as mentioned in the OP.
457/524
If you have to point out that a comment was meant to "make one laugh", you wiffed it.
Personally, I did not think it was that funny. But, thanks for playing.
Well that says more about you 8:13 being humorless and not getting the joke than it does about any of the foregoing clever content by multiple contributors.
Oh. I got the joke and frankly I am funny as fk. You might want to read the comment again.
Just thought it was silly and perhaps in some poor taste (ref. German comment)
Judging jokes on taste about a very public story. What is next? A Civility Creed?
Now that was funny.
State Bar Pres Armeni to membership:
Y'all behave and be nice to each other.
(newly adopted creed of professionalism and civility)
I know no creed, but the Creed in Philly, whose name is Apollo.
I will accept my peers in law With Arms Wide Open. Before I take my One Last Breath, I will do my best to make this profession a better one than I found it. That would be My Sacrifice to this profession.
Well played to the both of you.
1240 is clearly on a Higher level than the rest of us.
Oh Stapp already.
114.
You win.
12:40 and 1:14 win the blog for today
Pretty sure I know who 12:40 is.
@9:31. 12:40 here. No you don't!
I heard the EJDC judges were decided. Any word from anybody? I didn’t hear the names.
Telles is shocking bad at simply being in court. He's confused and overwhelmed. If he actually represents himself at trial he'll get slaughtered
Robert Telles just filed a handwritten, Motion to Compel Clark County Detention Center to Provide Lawful Housing and Legal Research Access [Docket #25]. C-22-368935-1
In another jurisdiction…
https://www.foxnews.com/us/florida-attorney-blew-stolen-client-money-onlyfans-porn-site-drugs-sheriff
I don't get it. At least in Las Vegas if an attorney steals his client's money, he blows it on physical blow and hoes. Seeking carnal pleasure on a screen is just gross and incomprehensible to me. Then again, perhaps the available inventory of easy women in FL forced the poor guy to seek it online. Very sad.
It is a bar full of "Florida man" so what did you expect?
http://www.clarkcountycourts.us/nevada-governor-announces-two-eighth-judicial-district-court-appointments/
Imagine losing a Justice Court seating and then landing in a District Court appointment. Falling up.
Imagine, indeed.
Congrats to newly appointed District Court judges Danielle Chio and Jacob Reynolds — not the best choices, but clearly the most predictable.
Could have been much worse.
I question Chio's intellect taking on Joe. Guessing she gets voted out next run.
The Board of Governors is a joke. We've got attorneys and judges killing themselves left and right and they publish some 1st amendment infringing civility policy? Astoundingly the sad state of our collective mental health is not their concern, but whether or not we act like nice little robots is. This is just the beginning. They've gone through and laid the foundation for anything you say to be used as a basis for a bar complaint. Opposing counsel doesn't like you, they can file a bar complaint and allege that you called them names during a meet and confer. Someone overhears you drop an f-bomb in the elevator at the RJC, they can report you. Even if you prevail on the bar complaint, you're going to be out however many thousands of dollars you've got to pay Bare to represent you. OBC has no business regulating civility and they claim that's not what they do, but they absolutely are doing just that. Who wants to start the campaign to draft Dominic Gentile?
That "creed" was barely coherent and incredibly insulting. Things like "don't ask for continuances with no good reason" followed by "give people a continuance if they want to go to a conferences." While they gallivant to New York. They should be embarrassed. I once saw a member of the board of governors make fun of a crying, grieving witness behind their hand to their co-counsel during an evidentiary hearing. I noticed, the judge noticed. They for sure don't follow this haphazard "creed."
I made it through number 5 before I couldn't go on anymore. Absurd content and poorly worded.
What is with all the "creed' references?
Not saying I hate it, but dayuummmm. This thing has really come Full Circle.
This is incredibly atrocious. I am not against civility content and encouragement. But this "creed" is nonsense as written.
This one is such word salad, may as well be copypasta: "We will never permit zealous advocacy to carry us beyond sobriety and decorum to disparaging personal remarks or acrimony." https://nvbar.org/for-lawyers/ethics-discipline/creed-of-professionalism-and-civility
Eff this. I am in it for the battle.
The bar could have had ChatGPT put together something better.
I asked ChatGPT to rewrite the "creed" for clarity. This is the result:
As lawyers, we uphold personal courtesy and professional integrity while fulfilling our duty to represent clients vigorously. We recognize the importance of the administration of justice, which is a truth-seeking process aimed at resolving human and societal problems in a rational, peaceful, and efficient manner. We remain committed to the rule of law as the foundation for a just and peaceful society.
We acknowledge that uncivil, abrasive, abusive, hostile, or obstructive conduct impedes the fundamental goal of resolving disputes rationally, peacefully, and efficiently. Therefore, we will exhibit courtesy, candor, and cooperation when participating in the legal system and dealing with the public, which are hallmarks of a learned profession dedicated to public service.
We understand that ethical problems arise from the conflict between a lawyer’s responsibilities to clients, to the legal system, and to the lawyer’s own interests. We recognize that the Rules of Professional Conduct resolve such conflicts, but they cannot address every conflict that may arise. Therefore, we have developed these voluntary standards to honor the spirit of the Rules and to balance a lawyer’s obligation to protect and pursue a client’s legitimate interests zealously, within the bounds of the law, while maintaining a professional, courteous, and civil attitude toward all persons in the legal system.
We expect lawyers to commit to the spirit and letter of these standards, and we encourage law schools and continuing legal education courses to incorporate them into their teaching of professionalism to law students and practicing lawyers. We also recommend that lawyers make copies of these standards available to clients and that adjudicators reinforce them in the courtroom.
CREED:
We will strive to find harmony in our responsibilities as a representative of clients, as officers of the legal system, and as public citizens.
We will treat all participants of the legal system in a civil and courteous manner, not only in court, but also in all other written and oral communications.
We will never permit zealous advocacy to carry us beyond sobriety and decorum to disparaging personal remarks or acrimony.
We will demonstrate civility, professional integrity, personal dignity, respect, courtesy, and cooperation because they are essential to the fair administration of justice and conflict resolution.
We will not encourage or knowingly authorize any person under our control to engage in uncivil conduct.
We will not attribute bad motives or improper conduct to other counsel without good cause or bring the profession into disrepute by unfounded accusations of impropriety.
We will avoid ex parte communications with the court or tribunal, including the judge’s staff, on pending matters, except when permitted by law.
We will adhere to promises and agreements fairly reached, whether orally or in writing, in good faith. When reiterating oral promises or agreements in writing, we will fairly, completely, and in good faith, restate all elements of the parties’ oral agreement.
We will confer early with other counsel to assess settlement possibilities. We will not falsely hold out the possibility of settlement to adjourn discovery or to delay trial.
We will stipulate to undisputed matters unless we have a good-faith basis not to stipulate.
We will try in good faith to resolve our objections with opposing counsel.
We will not time the filing or service of motions or pleadings in any way that unfairly limits another party’s opportunity to respond.
We will not request an extension of time without just cause.
We will consult other counsel regarding scheduling matters in a good-faith effort to avoid scheduling conflicts.
We will endeavor to accommodate previously scheduled dates for hearings, depositions, meetings, conferences, vacations, seminars, or other functions of other counsel.
We will explain to our clients that cooperation is the professional norm.
I asked ChatGPT to create a list of rules for attorneys for civility and professionalism:
Here are some general professionalism and civility rules for attorneys:
Show respect to all parties in the legal process, including clients, judges, opposing counsel, and court staff.
Be punctual and prepared for all meetings, court appearances, and other events.
Avoid personal attacks and offensive language in all communications, including emails, letters, and conversations.
Maintain confidentiality of client information and other privileged information.
Avoid conflicts of interest and maintain impartiality.
Adhere to all ethical rules and regulations, including those established by the state bar association.
Avoid frivolous or meritless legal arguments and pursue only those claims that have a reasonable basis in fact and law.
Act with integrity in all dealings, including billing and fee arrangements.
Be courteous and professional in all interactions, even when disagreements arise.
Strive to uphold the highest standards of professionalism and civility in the legal profession.
"While these standards are voluntary and not a basis for litigation or sanctions, violations of these standards may trigger sanctions…"
Exactly. We don’t enforce civility except when we feel like it.
We (who be we anywho?) want civility? Simple, no Californians or New Yorkers. There, problem solved. Pop the bubbly.
Thank you 9:39. Nice to know I'm not the only one whose head exploded reading that. Once more for those in the back.
While these standards are voluntary and not a basis for litigation or sanctions, violations of these standards may trigger sanctions.
Wow.
Translated: This creed is meant to help you practice without being an asshole. These standards – by themselves – aren't a basis for discipline, but some of these standards cover conduct that is by itself sanctionable. So even if this creed didn't exist, doing that shit can and should get you sanctioned.
Wheaton's Law. Learn it, follow it, teach it. We'll all be better off.
Amen 10:37!