What the flying heck? I just stumbled upon a series of cases in which Steve Gibson strikes again. Appears to be a fight over an $1100 security deposit. 88 filings in the Court file. Another reminder that we as attorneys can be like a dog with a bone. Case No. 20C023518
I don't do anything in Justice Court, but is there something such as the Portal in District Court, but for justice court? I see I can file documents in the e-file & serve in LV JC but I didn't see anything giving access to download pleadings/filings/orders/etc.
That is incorrect (although I did not know that it was incorrect). Justice Court has a program called "Justice Court Partner" through Tyler Technologies. Similar to District Court. Pay I think $99 a year and get access to all filed documents. Only LVJC.
The LVJC clerk's office apparently doesn't know that, and they haven't exactly advertised it well. I wonder if that product is mainly intended for criminal practitioners and those adjacent to the courts for criminal cases.
In addition to planning for a rainy day and beefing up court infrastructure, this state needs to take a look at judicial compensation. When you pay district court judges the same amount as a 5 year associate, the only candidates you’ll get are lawyers who can’t compete and lawyers who need a government job because they didn’t put anything into their 401k.
$180,000 not including PERS and benefits. Lets use Transparent Nevada. Judge Jessica Peterson in her first year on the bench for 2021 $153,424.75 salary; $48,026.31 in benefits for $203,642.84.
Conversely Michelle Leavitt and Mark Denton: $194,656.36 in salary but $101,570.79 in benefits.
District Court judges make $160K per year. New judges without prior PERS participation are required to self contribute at a rate of 17% off the top starting this year reducing the annual pre-tax take home to $132,800. After four years of service, a DJ may receive at 2% annual cost of living each year (longevity). Nationwide, state trial court judges average $225K in annual compensation. By 2026, district court judges statewide will not have received any raise in pay for about 18 years (I believe).
3:46PM here. Please compare these figures to Las Vegas Municipal Court judges and other limited jurisdiction judges who work four days per week and earn approximately $20K per year more than a district court judge. It is a much better bang for your buck.
First, Nevada judges make more, in some cases a lot more, than state court judges in other western states.
Next comparing a state court judge to an associate at a law firm is ridiculous. Most state court judges work half the number of hours a 5 year associate at a good firm works. Being a state court judge in Nevada is a piece of cake. For anyone who values stress-free time away from the office, this is the job for you.
Got the SBN newsletter. I am generally in favor of the principles of DEI. However this DEI certification that SBN is spending time, money and resources on is a complete farce. Poorly planned and clearly deferential to large firms (pretty much like every SBN program).
The problem with DEI is it is a rigid ideology that imposes this victimhood mentality that inhibits personal growth and organizational effectiveness. It is hard enough to motivate the youth of today without them being able to hide behind whatever intersectional shield they have.
Sure, the rainbow and unicorn version talks in sweet terms about uncovering structural issues (sound like another ideology that had disastrous consequences in the 20th century?) but the solution is not self-discovery or self-development or a group commitment to get along so as to further a common goal; no, the solution is eternal division and monitoring that certain predetermined outcomes must be achieved at any cost.
The worst part is you never know exactly where the winds will take the most current iteration of DEI. I shudder to think I will be forced to hire a man who identifies as a woman over a woman who is a woman to fill a woman's space in the equity formula. Is this how feminism ends? With a man at sitting on top of the glass ceiling again?
I’m outraged that allegedly educated people allow themselves to be distracted by non-issues because Tucker told them to be outraged. 9:01 wants you all to get off his lawn.
2:16. I am the OP. I am not outraged other than I invite you to look at the DEI certification application and decide if you believe that this is a good use of State Bar resources. I encourage diversity and inclusion and think we can all do more personally. This is an issue because the SBN is making it a front and center issue by spending resources on it.
2:16 here – so what? I’d rather they spend money on a good cause like DEI than giving more money to the rabid OBC. It’s hard out here for a solo. I don’t need to get caught up in a formal disciplinary proceeding because some bitter opposing counsel wants to accuse me of being uncivil after I win a case.
2:16/5:00 p.m I appreciate your polite response but believe you are engaged in false equivalencies. Spending money on DEI and spending money effectively on DEI are different things. Second you indicate that you are a solo; that means that it is almost impossible for you to get a DEI badge. Over the past year, SBN has highlighted firms; almost all were large firms. SBN has spent your resources promoting only large firms with their DEI budget. It is a mutual congratulations society.
Guest
Anonymous
March 16, 2023 8:11 pm
What can we do to defund the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada? I'm so tired of that office. It has 80 attorneys listed on their website. That has to be one of the top 3 sized law firms in Nevada by now. It's ridiculous the power that they yield over the community, courts, and state. They're once again framing and writing legislation for this legislative session that harms our profession. They have moved beyond their purpose of "providing direct legal representation, counsel, advice, and community legal education to those who can't afford an attorney." They need competition and to be defunded.
What about the connection between LACSN and the relentless prosecution of SOLOs by the Bar (SOLOs provide a LOT of the services that overlap with LACSN)?
"What about the connection between LACSN and the relentless prosecution of SOLOs by the Bar (SOLOs provide a LOT of the services that overlap with LACSN)?" This is perhaps one of the worst arguments that I have heard. LACSN relies heavily on solos and smalls for pro bono services. They do not want to compete or cause prosecution of law firms; they want to place cases which have traditionally fallen disproprotionately on solos and smalls. LACSN used to get grants from the State Bar of Nevada's LRIS program to help fund services. Guess who does LRIS? Solos and smalls. LACSN loves and relies heavily on solos and smalls.
If you want to argue that LACSN has gotten too big and resources between legal service providers should be spread out to more programs, I am all for that. But to argue LACSN is causing the OBC to prosecute solos and smalls so there can be more business for Legal Aid, well that is just silly.
1:49, you seem sincere so I will answer sincerely (1:40 here). My one sentence was not too articulate and I did not mean to suggest what you are thinking I meant (my fault). I'm very busy in the office but I'll try – the bar will latch on to anything to justify their persecution of SOLOS – one area, in their mind, is that SOLO's are not needed as much in the Pro Bono area because LACSN exists. That is NOT the fault of LACSN (who I love) but reflects a mindset of PP, DH, etc.
2:03– I appreciate the clarification but can confirm that of all of the reasons that OBC goes after solos, " SOLO's are not needed as much in the Pro Bono area because LACSN exists" is not the reason.
I think this whole post was started by an attorney who got mad because LACSN and all the legal aid agencies in this state wrote an amicus brief in favor of ONvJ at the Supreme Court. Said attorney thought their place on the LACSN board would ensure blind allegiance and it didn’t so now said attorney has a sad face and is trying to tie LACSN to the rabid beasts over at OBC.
OP here. I'm speaking of the rash of consumer protection laws that have been ushered through our legislature by LACSN over the past 6+ years. They're up to it again in this session. The Nevada Consumer Finance Division has admitted (I think it was in a deposition over the medical collection bill that passed in 2021) that they looked to LACSN for guidance on how to implement and enforce the law. If Babs "Elizabeth Warren" Bugsy wants to pass legislation, she should run for office. Otherwise, stick to defending the poor and indigent.
After one of the attorneys at LACSN viciously libeled me personally in a pleading for no good reason and on allegations that were demonstrably false, I have vowed never to do any pro bono work for that outfit again. This attorney even emailed me to apologize and said it was nothing personal. Right. LACSN has become too powerful and virtually untouchable.
How many of the 80 attorneys at LACSN handle cases and clients? One prominent member of Assembly is an attorney at LACSN. That is a lot influence. Any clients that I have sent to LACSN were turned down or were unable to get any help whatsoever. They came up with more excuses than the holes in a piece of Swiss cheese. But they do have good information posted on their website. I believe they run the self help center at the courthouse. I liked Jim Berchtold when he was there and their consumer attorneys. Good resource.
"How many of the 80 attorneys at LACSN handle cases"
In my memory, not many. Most of the cases are farmed out to pro bono volunteers. Look around the next time you are sitting in the gallery in court. Any LASCN lawyers there?
BTW – I stopped handling LASCN pro bono litigation. Why? I liked helping, but the indigent client has no money for discovery, an investigator or copying exhibits, etc. As as result I was coming out of pocket. Yes, there are discounted fee arrangements, but if LASCN is going to take a litigation case it should also pay the costs of prosecuting the case. Otherwise its only a shell game to call it legal aid.
After doing more Pro Bono cases for Buckleys group than I can count the day came when I asked Buckley for some assistance on a matter. She totally blew me off and that was the day I turned my back on her power trip.
New legislation in Carson City would increase money going to LACSN. It is in bill that would clean up some language in guardianship. We need more guardianship judges not more money for LACSN
To be fair, LACSN almost single handedly cleaned up guardianship. We do need more judges. But dont minimize the impact LACSN had in cleaning up that cesspool.
What’s with all the hate towards LACN. Their lawyers make 1/2 what we make in private practice and they only help poor people.
Guest
Anonymous
March 16, 2023 10:31 pm
AI passing the bar exam does not mean it can keep up with human lawyers, especially since the same can be said about humans that pass the bar exam. Now if the bar exam had anything to do with the actual practice of law, this might be newsworthy, but since it isn't, I will politely wait before I start accepting our new AI overlords.
To the degree the bar exam rewards a skill (memorization of a wide range of key points and issues), I agree AI's ability to pass a bar exam isn't exactly apples to applies, because the AI "memorizes" the same information with near-perfect accuracy by design (still pretty valuable to have the whole of the law at your fingertips IMO). What's more significant is that the engineers improved the AI's bar exam performance from the 10th percentile to the 99th. That improvement could be a refinement of the databases the AI draws from, or it could be a significant increase in the AI's ability to read nuance into natural language prompts. Seems to me that the ability to recognize natural-language question prompts, appreciate fine distinctions between them, and persuasively apply the law to a set of discrete is a cornerstone of legal practice, no? And to the degree the bar exam tests that valuable skill, engineers trained the AI to surpass pretty much all human lawyers in a matter of months.
In other news, a video game company apparently replaced its CEO with an artificial intelligence bot about eight months ago, and since then the company's stock has risen at a market-beating rate. With all of the talk about undeserved CEO pay / bonuses in light of the current banking crisis, it seems as though replacing corporate CEOs with artificial intelligence would be a win-win for everyone – lower corporate costs, higher company value.
Guest
Anonymous
March 17, 2023 3:57 am
Looks like J. Scott Mcdonald consented to disbarment.
That would be uncharacteristically fast for a consented disbarment to be reached. I would be very surprised as MacDonald retained Rob Bare who attended all of the prior proceedings. But I am open to hearing 8:57's source of information.
Scott MacDONALD…
Barred on a SUNDAY
BEEFED on a MONDAY
PETITIONED on a TUESDAY
RETAINED on a WEDNESDAY
FILED on a THURSDAY
DISBARRED on a FRIDAY
RETIRED on a SATURDAY
Scott MacDonald got "divorced," gave his wife the house, and consented to disbarment in less than a month. I bet he consented because he stole more than what is reflected in public records and he doesn't want that to come out.
What the flying heck? I just stumbled upon a series of cases in which Steve Gibson strikes again. Appears to be a fight over an $1100 security deposit. 88 filings in the Court file. Another reminder that we as attorneys can be like a dog with a bone. Case No. 20C023518
I don't do anything in Justice Court, but is there something such as the Portal in District Court, but for justice court? I see I can file documents in the e-file & serve in LV JC but I didn't see anything giving access to download pleadings/filings/orders/etc.
Nope, gotta get them the old fashion way at the courthouse.
That is incorrect (although I did not know that it was incorrect). Justice Court has a program called "Justice Court Partner" through Tyler Technologies. Similar to District Court. Pay I think $99 a year and get access to all filed documents. Only LVJC.
The LVJC clerk's office apparently doesn't know that, and they haven't exactly advertised it well. I wonder if that product is mainly intended for criminal practitioners and those adjacent to the courts for criminal cases.
I am strictly a civil practitioner and use it all of the time. No they have no advertised it at all. https://lvjcpa.clarkcountynv.gov/Secure/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fsecure%2fdefault.aspx
In addition to planning for a rainy day and beefing up court infrastructure, this state needs to take a look at judicial compensation. When you pay district court judges the same amount as a 5 year associate, the only candidates you’ll get are lawyers who can’t compete and lawyers who need a government job because they didn’t put anything into their 401k.
Judge Gall?
Adam Ganz? Phil Aurbach? Terry Coffing?
What is the pay for district court judges?
I think it is about $180,000. In my experience that is much higher than a 5 year associate.
$180,000 not including PERS and benefits. Lets use Transparent Nevada. Judge Jessica Peterson in her first year on the bench for 2021 $153,424.75 salary; $48,026.31 in benefits for $203,642.84.
Conversely Michelle Leavitt and Mark Denton: $194,656.36 in salary but $101,570.79 in benefits.
Peterson is a great judge and worth every penny. Aurbach and Coffing would be worth every cent.
The judges self fund their PERS now. It’s not great. Transparency NV is not a good source.
District Court judges make $160K per year. New judges without prior PERS participation are required to self contribute at a rate of 17% off the top starting this year reducing the annual pre-tax take home to $132,800. After four years of service, a DJ may receive at 2% annual cost of living each year (longevity). Nationwide, state trial court judges average $225K in annual compensation. By 2026, district court judges statewide will not have received any raise in pay for about 18 years (I believe).
3:46PM here. Please compare these figures to Las Vegas Municipal Court judges and other limited jurisdiction judges who work four days per week and earn approximately $20K per year more than a district court judge. It is a much better bang for your buck.
NRS 3.030 sets it at $160,000. The fact that judicial salaries are locked in by statute without an inflation adjustment is crazy.
Don't you worry, the judges have lobbyists working on an increase this session. They should and likely will receive a substantial increase in pay.
I stand corrected. They get a whopping 2 percent per year, not to exceed 22 percent total, which is why the old guard is capped out at about $195,000.
First, Nevada judges make more, in some cases a lot more, than state court judges in other western states.
Next comparing a state court judge to an associate at a law firm is ridiculous. Most state court judges work half the number of hours a 5 year associate at a good firm works. Being a state court judge in Nevada is a piece of cake. For anyone who values stress-free time away from the office, this is the job for you.
Pers going to implode in 321…..
1:24 is hilarious. Peterson. Hilarious.
Got the SBN newsletter. I am generally in favor of the principles of DEI. However this DEI certification that SBN is spending time, money and resources on is a complete farce. Poorly planned and clearly deferential to large firms (pretty much like every SBN program).
I am outraged that DEI is being forced down our throats.
The problem with DEI is it is a rigid ideology that imposes this victimhood mentality that inhibits personal growth and organizational effectiveness. It is hard enough to motivate the youth of today without them being able to hide behind whatever intersectional shield they have.
Sure, the rainbow and unicorn version talks in sweet terms about uncovering structural issues (sound like another ideology that had disastrous consequences in the 20th century?) but the solution is not self-discovery or self-development or a group commitment to get along so as to further a common goal; no, the solution is eternal division and monitoring that certain predetermined outcomes must be achieved at any cost.
The worst part is you never know exactly where the winds will take the most current iteration of DEI. I shudder to think I will be forced to hire a man who identifies as a woman over a woman who is a woman to fill a woman's space in the equity formula. Is this how feminism ends? With a man at sitting on top of the glass ceiling again?
I’m outraged that allegedly educated people allow themselves to be distracted by non-issues because Tucker told them to be outraged. 9:01 wants you all to get off his lawn.
2:16. I am the OP. I am not outraged other than I invite you to look at the DEI certification application and decide if you believe that this is a good use of State Bar resources. I encourage diversity and inclusion and think we can all do more personally. This is an issue because the SBN is making it a front and center issue by spending resources on it.
2:16 here – so what? I’d rather they spend money on a good cause like DEI than giving more money to the rabid OBC. It’s hard out here for a solo. I don’t need to get caught up in a formal disciplinary proceeding because some bitter opposing counsel wants to accuse me of being uncivil after I win a case.
2:16/5:00 p.m I appreciate your polite response but believe you are engaged in false equivalencies. Spending money on DEI and spending money effectively on DEI are different things. Second you indicate that you are a solo; that means that it is almost impossible for you to get a DEI badge. Over the past year, SBN has highlighted firms; almost all were large firms. SBN has spent your resources promoting only large firms with their DEI budget. It is a mutual congratulations society.
What can we do to defund the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada? I'm so tired of that office. It has 80 attorneys listed on their website. That has to be one of the top 3 sized law firms in Nevada by now. It's ridiculous the power that they yield over the community, courts, and state. They're once again framing and writing legislation for this legislative session that harms our profession. They have moved beyond their purpose of "providing direct legal representation, counsel, advice, and community legal education to those who can't afford an attorney." They need competition and to be defunded.
Bandy Buckley, no way
Babsy
You sound ridiculous.
What about the connection between LACSN and the relentless prosecution of SOLOs by the Bar (SOLOs provide a LOT of the services that overlap with LACSN)?
Not OP – but 1:38 is clearly not a domestic relations lawyer or would know exactly what 1:11 refers to
"What about the connection between LACSN and the relentless prosecution of SOLOs by the Bar (SOLOs provide a LOT of the services that overlap with LACSN)?" This is perhaps one of the worst arguments that I have heard. LACSN relies heavily on solos and smalls for pro bono services. They do not want to compete or cause prosecution of law firms; they want to place cases which have traditionally fallen disproprotionately on solos and smalls. LACSN used to get grants from the State Bar of Nevada's LRIS program to help fund services. Guess who does LRIS? Solos and smalls. LACSN loves and relies heavily on solos and smalls.
If you want to argue that LACSN has gotten too big and resources between legal service providers should be spread out to more programs, I am all for that. But to argue LACSN is causing the OBC to prosecute solos and smalls so there can be more business for Legal Aid, well that is just silly.
1:49, you seem sincere so I will answer sincerely (1:40 here). My one sentence was not too articulate and I did not mean to suggest what you are thinking I meant (my fault). I'm very busy in the office but I'll try – the bar will latch on to anything to justify their persecution of SOLOS – one area, in their mind, is that SOLO's are not needed as much in the Pro Bono area because LACSN exists. That is NOT the fault of LACSN (who I love) but reflects a mindset of PP, DH, etc.
2:03– I appreciate the clarification but can confirm that of all of the reasons that OBC goes after solos, " SOLO's are not needed as much in the Pro Bono area because LACSN exists" is not the reason.
I think this whole post was started by an attorney who got mad because LACSN and all the legal aid agencies in this state wrote an amicus brief in favor of ONvJ at the Supreme Court. Said attorney thought their place on the LACSN board would ensure blind allegiance and it didn’t so now said attorney has a sad face and is trying to tie LACSN to the rabid beasts over at OBC.
OP here. I'm speaking of the rash of consumer protection laws that have been ushered through our legislature by LACSN over the past 6+ years. They're up to it again in this session. The Nevada Consumer Finance Division has admitted (I think it was in a deposition over the medical collection bill that passed in 2021) that they looked to LACSN for guidance on how to implement and enforce the law. If Babs "Elizabeth Warren" Bugsy wants to pass legislation, she should run for office. Otherwise, stick to defending the poor and indigent.
After one of the attorneys at LACSN viciously libeled me personally in a pleading for no good reason and on allegations that were demonstrably false, I have vowed never to do any pro bono work for that outfit again. This attorney even emailed me to apologize and said it was nothing personal. Right. LACSN has become too powerful and virtually untouchable.
How many of the 80 attorneys at LACSN handle cases and clients? One prominent member of Assembly is an attorney at LACSN. That is a lot influence. Any clients that I have sent to LACSN were turned down or were unable to get any help whatsoever. They came up with more excuses than the holes in a piece of Swiss cheese. But they do have good information posted on their website. I believe they run the self help center at the courthouse. I liked Jim Berchtold when he was there and their consumer attorneys. Good resource.
"How many of the 80 attorneys at LACSN handle cases"
In my memory, not many. Most of the cases are farmed out to pro bono volunteers. Look around the next time you are sitting in the gallery in court. Any LASCN lawyers there?
BTW – I stopped handling LASCN pro bono litigation. Why? I liked helping, but the indigent client has no money for discovery, an investigator or copying exhibits, etc. As as result I was coming out of pocket. Yes, there are discounted fee arrangements, but if LASCN is going to take a litigation case it should also pay the costs of prosecuting the case. Otherwise its only a shell game to call it legal aid.
After doing more Pro Bono cases for Buckleys group than I can count the day came when I asked Buckley for some assistance on a matter. She totally blew me off and that was the day I turned my back on her power trip.
She is a negative force with too much power and money.
New legislation in Carson City would increase money going to LACSN. It is in bill that would clean up some language in guardianship. We need more guardianship judges not more money for LACSN
To be fair, LACSN almost single handedly cleaned up guardianship. We do need more judges. But dont minimize the impact LACSN had in cleaning up that cesspool.
LACSN is destroying guardianship practice today. It is pushing law firms out of the area.
I am involved in guardianship. I would be interested to hear how and why you believe LACSN is pushing firms out of guardianship.
What’s with all the hate towards LACN. Their lawyers make 1/2 what we make in private practice and they only help poor people.
AI passing the bar exam does not mean it can keep up with human lawyers, especially since the same can be said about humans that pass the bar exam. Now if the bar exam had anything to do with the actual practice of law, this might be newsworthy, but since it isn't, I will politely wait before I start accepting our new AI overlords.
To the degree the bar exam rewards a skill (memorization of a wide range of key points and issues), I agree AI's ability to pass a bar exam isn't exactly apples to applies, because the AI "memorizes" the same information with near-perfect accuracy by design (still pretty valuable to have the whole of the law at your fingertips IMO). What's more significant is that the engineers improved the AI's bar exam performance from the 10th percentile to the 99th. That improvement could be a refinement of the databases the AI draws from, or it could be a significant increase in the AI's ability to read nuance into natural language prompts. Seems to me that the ability to recognize natural-language question prompts, appreciate fine distinctions between them, and persuasively apply the law to a set of discrete is a cornerstone of legal practice, no? And to the degree the bar exam tests that valuable skill, engineers trained the AI to surpass pretty much all human lawyers in a matter of months.
In other news, a video game company apparently replaced its CEO with an artificial intelligence bot about eight months ago, and since then the company's stock has risen at a market-beating rate. With all of the talk about undeserved CEO pay / bonuses in light of the current banking crisis, it seems as though replacing corporate CEOs with artificial intelligence would be a win-win for everyone – lower corporate costs, higher company value.
Looks like J. Scott Mcdonald consented to disbarment.
Are you sure? He's on BlueJeans for probate court right now.
That would be uncharacteristically fast for a consented disbarment to be reached. I would be very surprised as MacDonald retained Rob Bare who attended all of the prior proceedings. But I am open to hearing 8:57's source of information.
The order was filed this morning and posted the the State Bar website.
Here is the order it was just filed:
https://nvbar.org/wp-content/uploads/Order-of-Disbarment-John-S.-MacDonald-BCH.pdf
I am stunned but it is true. So what did Greg Wilde know?
Well that is crazy because he appeared in probate court this morning for a sale on behalf of an estate.
Wonder if he did not know that the Order had gone through that fast.
Scott MacDONALD…
Barred on a SUNDAY
BEEFED on a MONDAY
PETITIONED on a TUESDAY
RETAINED on a WEDNESDAY
FILED on a THURSDAY
DISBARRED on a FRIDAY
RETIRED on a SATURDAY
Scott MacDonald got "divorced," gave his wife the house, and consented to disbarment in less than a month. I bet he consented because he stole more than what is reflected in public records and he doesn't want that to come out.
Not going to be hard for someone to run a search of the cases that Scott filed over the past 5 years and see which of them involved excess proceeds.