I don't know what the turnout is for this election. But I'm guessing it's not high. I probably wouldn't have voted if I weren't following this blog which keeps me up to date on some of the issues going on with the BOG. I made a decision to vote against the current BOGs and I emailed quite a few of my friends who are attorneys and suggested they vote as well. So while I may be the only one of my friends who follows this blog, I'm aware of at least 5 of my friends who voted the same way. It just takes a bit of information and some peer pressure to make a change.
I have no idea what the participation rate is for these elections. I know that I went at least a decade or so without voting at all. My guess is that it's low enough that a dozen or two votes one way or the other could make a big difference. So vote early and often!
If bar leaders had any regard for transparency, we'd know how many members vote in these elections and how many votes each candidate receives. We'd also know what Kim Farmer is compensated annually and how much the bar spent to settle those three employee lawsuits against her. We might even find out how much of our money is annually spent on governors' meals, travel and lodgings and how much it costs to carry all those moochers and assorted hangers-on attending those expensive out-of-state annual conventions on our dime.
Amen 1:45. The current Board wants ZERO transparency. After all, it is their money not yours.
Guest
Alexander Falconi
May 15, 2018 4:02 pm
Thanks for sharing!
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 4:16 pm
Coffing not Quinn
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 4:31 pm
I know the rules permit judges and prosecutors to carry in the RJC, but why should prosecutors get to carry. Defense attorneys have just as much reason to fear their clients.
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 6:06 pm
Did anyone post about the temporary suspensions of Amy Gamage and Bill Gamage upon the allegation that thousands of dollars have gone missing?
75386 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF WILLIAM GAMAGE May 11, 2018
75387 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF AMY GAMAGE May 11, 2018
Classy of Bar Counsel to publish information without redaction about one treating with a psychiatrist. Civility and mental health are not important to Bar Counsel but the rest of us need CLE on these topics?
I want to keep an eye on these cases, if for no other reason than to check the eventual costs OBC is going to demand as compensation on two nearly identical complaints. Full boat on both is my guess. No discount for copying and pasting.
Under the rules, OBC now gets $2500 per suspension and $2500 per reinstatement. So these will be a MINIMUM of $10,000 in OBC fees. Plus the Gamages will be required to pay the outside auditor fees. If you follow the cases where an auditor has been called in, the average (not counting Graham) is around $6000.
I started to glance over what was submitted. Some of it was pertinent to know about and arguably a matter of public interest; other portions made me feel like a voyeur (and not in a good way). Obviously a couple of personal and professional lives went completely off the rails, which doesn't excuse the wrongdoing, but makes one wish that it was easier for lawyers to get help when things start coming apart on them for whatever reason. May or may not have made a difference here; I obviously don't know all of the background. I do know that they have young children though.
This right here is the reason why LCL is good in theory and disasterous in practice because who in the THEIR RIGHT MIND would cooperate with the State Bar or OBC in anything these days? There was the case referenced last week where the attorney was told by OBC to mitigate by voluntarily winding down his practice and transitioning his clients and then to suspend himself, only to have the suspension run LONGER for cooperating. OBC is now about personal destruction and no longer about protecting the public in any way shape or form. Do not cooperate. Do not disclose. Do not mitigate.
I am sad to see this. I had a case against Bill many years ago and really liked him. He did a good job and was pleasant to deal with. I hope he and his wife can get their lives back on track.
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 6:40 pm
Dear State Bar of Nevada:
You miserable pieces. So you send me an email today telling me to go to the website of The Drake Hotel for your folly of a convention. "There are only a few weeks left to get discounted rates at the Drake Hotel in Chicago, where the State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting is taking place, July 12-14." Here is what the Hotel Website states…..
Reservation Summary
12 Jul 2018 – 15 Jul 2018, 1 room for 1 adult Change
There are no rooms available for 12 Jul 2018 – 15 Jul 2018 at The Drake, a Hilton hotel.
So explain to me again how great this convention is again?
Yes I called the SBN immediately afterwards to ask and was told to call the Drake. The Drake said that there are no rooms, which then raises the question of how does the State Bar not know before sending out a blast email telling people to book rooms that there are no rooms.
You guys realize that the BOGs don't get paid, right? They're supposed to serve for 2 years without any pay and you're going to hold a trip to Chicago over their heads? I agree the locations should be a little more accessible to the regular members, but cut them some slack. They work hard and have a lot of tasks–with apparently little appreciation for what they do.
11:40, after expressing understandable frustration that no rooms are available, rhetorically asks "so explain to me again how great this convention is?"
But 11:40 ignores the circular, self-serving logic that those skilled in public relations and promotions will employ. These folks, rather than acknowledging the paucity, or even non-existence, of any remaining lodgings and/or offering to try to rectify matters, will instead argue as follows.
They will argue "See? See? We told you so. Since there are no rooms left that proves the convention is great and really popular."
Now, although in some sense that is pretzel logic, it is still logic in some sense of the term. And that will be their justification.
Also, as to the BOG elections, there is also some logical questions or lapses. Noting how displeased many of these bloggers on this site are as to bar leadership, random audits and other concerns, it is logical, as well as intelligent, that a few of the BOG candidates have taken to this site to state their positions.
But after taking that sensible and logical approach, they then ruin things for themselves with a narrative that they are incumbents, then trumpeting their supposed accomplishments on the board, and in essence promising all these aggrieved attorneys more of the same. Makes no sense. Now if candidates had posted here promising change, and offering specific policy concerns like being against the random audits, that would have made a lot of sense, and perhaps been quite productive for their election.
Also, would like to offer some comfort to 11:40 who was unhappy to learn there are no lodgings left for the convention.
11:40: You have been spared having to spend several days of your life holed up with other lawyers–many of them braggadocio and shamelessly self-promoting. Instead, get back to nature and go camp out with your spouse or significant other(and don't forget to bring a flask or two and liquids to fill them with).
My advice is always spot on and should be followed. Those who listen to me live better lives.
To all you folks mentioning audits, yes I agree smart BOG candidates should have indicated their opposition. That being said, the random audit issue is dead. Whatever one thinks of the NSC, they did the legal community as real solid as to this issue.
And yes, 11:40 is well served that all the rooms for the convention were sold out. I disagree that he/she should go camping instead, as I don't personally like camping. But perhaps an extended several day vacation to some place 11:40 enjoys would be the best alternative.
Thanks Kari, Ryan or Gene at 2:32, ". . . cut them some slack. They work hard and have a lot of tasks–with apparently little appreciation for what they do." So quit! ROFL!
This is 11:40. I had only a marginal interest in attending the Convention. However, since the SBN spends time and effort to fill up my mailbox, I thought I would at least see how much the State Bar believes is a reasonable amount of money to charge an attorney for 3 nights of lodging and seminars (after buying an airline ticket 2/3 of the way across the continent and transportation to get to the hotel).
The random audit issue is not dead. It did not pass this time because it was so poorly crafted and presented. It is likewise accompanied by numerous other poorly considered proposals (remember the proposed RPC on proper speech?)
To the Board Member who suggested that we should cut them some slack and give Board members all expense paid trips to Chicago because they show up once a month to eat Jason's Deli in secret, you are free to resign if the burden of service is too great.
Some get a member paid "Bar Presidents Wall of Fame" and all get their egos fed; their resumes burnished, and in their own minds, their career aspirations enhanced.
Don't I think a paid vacation is a fair trade? No! F*** no even. I think a free lunch for coming to the meeting is a fair trade. I have chaired one Board/Committee for the SBN. I chaired one of the Sections. I did not get a free vacation. I did not ask for a free vacation. I did not expect a free vacation. If you cannot handle being a Governor without a free vacation, then do not be a Governor.
I think BOG lawyers pay there own way for trips. I know NJA board members pay to attend convention, pay for their own room and travel expenses.
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 9:18 pm
So I read the Gamage pleadings which shows a REALLY big reason that Audits would be a disaster. The State Bar not only did not think anything about publishing private correspondence talking about mental health issues but published spreadsheets of all of the Gamages financial transactions. Those attorney/client privileged transactions between lawyers and clients? OBC has no problem publishing them after auditing your accounts, at least until it can be determined if they are confidential. Truly a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. I really thought better of Janeen than to pull this kind of garbage.
This is something that wouldn't have been so obvious, but for the random trust account audit proceedings. Now, I see this and think about all the privilege being violated by OBC by including that in a public filing. Enough is enough.
To be fair, they would file a Complaint because blowing your brains out is a violation of RPC 8.4(b). Hunterton and Hardesty would insist that disciplinary proceedings be undertaken and then seek disbarment when you did not answer the Complaint. Ask Asa Ginapp.
There are a bunch of socios at the OBC and NSC. There is no way that any confidential, HIPAA information should have been leaked on the Gamages. Get a good lawyer.
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 10:40 pm
Some history: In 1983 or 1984, Justice Al Gunderson tackled bar reform and created a Study Committee. Out of that effort came a bunch of rules changes. Bar conventions had to be held in Nevada every other year, BOGs had term limits and the President had to be elected not just move through the chairs. People didn't want to go to bar conventions in Laughlin or Vegas and the other places didn't have accomodations. Eventually, the rules were changed back again.
This sounds like a member of the BOG justifying. So what if it didn't work in the 80s. Times have changed. Fees are probably 10x higher. We don't want to pay for boondoggles. If you have an annual meeting, make it accessible to the membership. The majority of the bar is in Las Vegas. At the very least, have it here and if people want to attend, they can. Plus, it is easily accessible from the rest of the state and there are plenty of rooms. There is no justification for having the annual meeting in Seattle, Austin, Chicago, etc.
I'm not suggesting that conventions must be held at the Exchange Club in Beatty, (although that might be fun) but if you want to go out of state, keep it somewhere close-in that people can easily get to or even drive if they want, e.g. San Diego, Newport Beach, etc. Or to say it another way: use a little common sense.
There used to be a pattern on a 3 year rotation: (1) inside Nevada; (2) outside Nevada but close (Monterey, Newport, San Francisco, San Diego) and (3) Hawaii. The Hawaii trip was justified because it would be well attended and people had three years to plan. If they wanted to have it in Sedona or Newport, people would not complain. But Chicago? That is insanity. People would (and do) go to Tahoe. People would (and do) go to Vegas or Reno. I am a member of the Bar in 4 states. No other Nevada has member-funded out of state boondoggles like Nevada.
The best Bar conventions I attended were at the Inn at Furnace Creek and in Monterey. The most successful conventions occur when the group is confined to a fairly small area, and they are forced to interact. Once we had a Bar convention in San Diego, and the group was all over the county, at Sea World, the zoo, or the beach. There was no feeling of community. That is just one reason Chicago was a poor choice. In Clark County we could always go to Lake Las Vegas, which would provide activities while keeping the group close together. The resorts at Lake Tahoe are also good choices. Keep it close, confined and inexpensive.
Guest
Anonymous
May 15, 2018 11:29 pm
– E-files writ of execution for electronic issuance.
– Clerk's office drone rejects it because notice of execution is not attached to the writ.
– Looks at rejected document. Thumbs through 9 pages. Alas, pages 6-9: notice of execution.
– Resubmits entirely correct document with comment: Clerk–look at pages 6-9.
– Clerk's office drone rejects it again.
– Calls clerk.
– Clerk says: you have to attach the notice of execution as an attachment to the lead document.
– I calmly inform the clerk: the clerk's office disabled that feature in Odyssey some time ago and all published guidance from clerk's office says upload a single PDF with all attachments in that single PDF.
– Long period of silence on phone.
– Clerk's response: ooooohhhhhhh.
– Fully expecting the writ to be rejected for a few new reasons before some other drone finally accepts it.
Is it just me or is it time to downsize all of the redundant gatekeepers at the clerk's office.
Guest
Anonymous
May 16, 2018 12:04 am
-E-files Letters of Special Administration for Electronic Issuance.
-Twiddle my thumbs for 18-26 hours.
-Letters are issued.
Guest
Anonymous
May 16, 2018 12:15 am
–Uploads Tenant's Answer to Summary Eviction.
–Waits from Thursday until Tuesday morning with Answer in the queue. Tuesday is the 5th day of the 5 day notice
—Calls Clerk's Office to inquire what is going on; is told better high tail it down to the Clerk's Office and counter file the Answer because if the Complaint is counterfiled, the Summary Eviction will be granted (even though there is an Answer that will bear a date 5 calendar days earlier).
—Upon arriving at the Clerk's Office, summarily yelled at by the Clerk for counterfiling an Answer when it could have been e-filed from Attorney's Office. Calmly tell Clerk that there is one in the queue which has been there since Thursday. Clerk yells that they get to them when they get to them and throws unfiled Answer back at me.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE IN THE BOG ELECTIONS! MORE IMPORTANTLY, PLEASE ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO VOTE! THIS ELECTION WILL BE DETERMINED BY TURNOUT!
CHALLENGERS:
Andrew Craner*
Jessica Goodey*
Terry Coffing
Casey Quinn*
Cory Santos, Sr.*
Jay Shafer*
INCUMBENTS:
Paola Armeni
John "Jack" Howard, Jr.
Kari Stephens
Ryan Works
Statement by challenger Jay Shafer here: https://lasvegaslawblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/procedurally-improper.html?showComment=1526081354206#c6929486821478588602
Bios here: https://www.nvbar.org/about-us/board-of-governors/board-governors-elections/2018-board-governors-candidates/
*Candidates have publicly stated opposition to random audits of trust accounts.
Yes, keep posting this here so the five of you that are voting for change can convince yourselves there is a chance you will make a difference.
Thank you, BOGs. It influenced my vote.
9:17 AM – Why so salty?
I haven't received the email with the information to vote. Does anyone know who to contact or how to get my login information?
Check your SPAM folder of your emails. Quite a few people had it end up in SPAM.
9:17 — there's always a chance so long as we have this,
https://bit.ly/1kKBwaM
It is called sarcasm.
I don't know what the turnout is for this election. But I'm guessing it's not high. I probably wouldn't have voted if I weren't following this blog which keeps me up to date on some of the issues going on with the BOG. I made a decision to vote against the current BOGs and I emailed quite a few of my friends who are attorneys and suggested they vote as well. So while I may be the only one of my friends who follows this blog, I'm aware of at least 5 of my friends who voted the same way. It just takes a bit of information and some peer pressure to make a change.
I have no idea what the participation rate is for these elections. I know that I went at least a decade or so without voting at all. My guess is that it's low enough that a dozen or two votes one way or the other could make a big difference. So vote early and often!
Thanks – I just voted. This blog has been good in terms of raising interest. We pay a lot for what we get.
If bar leaders had any regard for transparency, we'd know how many members vote in these elections and how many votes each candidate receives. We'd also know what Kim Farmer is compensated annually and how much the bar spent to settle those three employee lawsuits against her. We might even find out how much of our money is annually spent on governors' meals, travel and lodgings and how much it costs to carry all those moochers and assorted hangers-on attending those expensive out-of-state annual conventions on our dime.
Amen 1:45. The current Board wants ZERO transparency. After all, it is their money not yours.
Thanks for sharing!
Coffing not Quinn
I know the rules permit judges and prosecutors to carry in the RJC, but why should prosecutors get to carry. Defense attorneys have just as much reason to fear their clients.
Did anyone post about the temporary suspensions of Amy Gamage and Bill Gamage upon the allegation that thousands of dollars have gone missing?
75386 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF WILLIAM GAMAGE May 11, 2018
75387 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF AMY GAMAGE May 11, 2018
Classy of Bar Counsel to publish information without redaction about one treating with a psychiatrist. Civility and mental health are not important to Bar Counsel but the rest of us need CLE on these topics?
I want to keep an eye on these cases, if for no other reason than to check the eventual costs OBC is going to demand as compensation on two nearly identical complaints. Full boat on both is my guess. No discount for copying and pasting.
Under the rules, OBC now gets $2500 per suspension and $2500 per reinstatement. So these will be a MINIMUM of $10,000 in OBC fees. Plus the Gamages will be required to pay the outside auditor fees. If you follow the cases where an auditor has been called in, the average (not counting Graham) is around $6000.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I started to glance over what was submitted. Some of it was pertinent to know about and arguably a matter of public interest; other portions made me feel like a voyeur (and not in a good way). Obviously a couple of personal and professional lives went completely off the rails, which doesn't excuse the wrongdoing, but makes one wish that it was easier for lawyers to get help when things start coming apart on them for whatever reason. May or may not have made a difference here; I obviously don't know all of the background. I do know that they have young children though.
This right here is the reason why LCL is good in theory and disasterous in practice because who in the THEIR RIGHT MIND would cooperate with the State Bar or OBC in anything these days? There was the case referenced last week where the attorney was told by OBC to mitigate by voluntarily winding down his practice and transitioning his clients and then to suspend himself, only to have the suspension run LONGER for cooperating. OBC is now about personal destruction and no longer about protecting the public in any way shape or form. Do not cooperate. Do not disclose. Do not mitigate.
I am sad to see this. I had a case against Bill many years ago and really liked him. He did a good job and was pleasant to deal with. I hope he and his wife can get their lives back on track.
Dear State Bar of Nevada:
You miserable pieces. So you send me an email today telling me to go to the website of The Drake Hotel for your folly of a convention. "There are only a few weeks left to get discounted rates at the Drake Hotel in Chicago, where the State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting is taking place, July 12-14." Here is what the Hotel Website states…..
Reservation Summary
12 Jul 2018 – 15 Jul 2018, 1 room for 1 adult Change
There are no rooms available for 12 Jul 2018 – 15 Jul 2018 at The Drake, a Hilton hotel.
So explain to me again how great this convention is again?
Have you tried calling them?
How great it is? It's the greatest convention. State Bar is making conventions great again.
Yes I called the SBN immediately afterwards to ask and was told to call the Drake. The Drake said that there are no rooms, which then raises the question of how does the State Bar not know before sending out a blast email telling people to book rooms that there are no rooms.
Vote them out. Vote them all out. All conventions should be held in Nevada, SoCal, or the Bay Area. That's it. There's plenty of options.
I suspect they hold these conventions in far flung locations in hotels with no rooms in an attempt to keep regular practitioners from participating.
This is ridiculous. Conventions should be in Las Vegas, Tahoe, or Ely.
I'd go to a bar convention in Pahrump or even Elko before I went to one in Chicago.
You guys realize that the BOGs don't get paid, right? They're supposed to serve for 2 years without any pay and you're going to hold a trip to Chicago over their heads? I agree the locations should be a little more accessible to the regular members, but cut them some slack. They work hard and have a lot of tasks–with apparently little appreciation for what they do.
11:40, after expressing understandable frustration that no rooms are available, rhetorically asks "so explain to me again how great this convention is?"
But 11:40 ignores the circular, self-serving logic that those skilled in public relations and promotions will employ. These folks, rather than acknowledging the paucity, or even non-existence, of any remaining lodgings and/or offering to try to rectify matters, will instead argue as follows.
They will argue "See? See? We told you so. Since there are no rooms left that proves the convention is great and really popular."
Now, although in some sense that is pretzel logic, it is still logic in some sense of the term. And that will be their justification.
Also, as to the BOG elections, there is also some logical questions or lapses. Noting how displeased many of these bloggers on this site are as to bar leadership, random audits and other concerns, it is logical, as well as intelligent, that a few of the BOG candidates have taken to this site to state their positions.
But after taking that sensible and logical approach, they then ruin things for themselves with a narrative that they are incumbents, then trumpeting their supposed accomplishments on the board, and in essence promising all these aggrieved attorneys more of the same. Makes no sense. Now if candidates had posted here promising change, and offering specific policy concerns like being against the random audits, that would have made a lot of sense, and perhaps been quite productive for their election.
Agree with 2:40.
Also, would like to offer some comfort to 11:40 who was unhappy to learn there are no lodgings left for the convention.
11:40: You have been spared having to spend several days of your life holed up with other lawyers–many of them braggadocio and shamelessly self-promoting. Instead, get back to nature and go camp out with your spouse or significant other(and don't forget to bring a flask or two and liquids to fill them with).
My advice is always spot on and should be followed. Those who listen to me live better lives.
To all you folks mentioning audits, yes I agree smart BOG candidates should have indicated their opposition. That being said, the random audit issue is dead. Whatever one thinks of the NSC, they did the legal community as real solid as to this issue.
And yes, 11:40 is well served that all the rooms for the convention were sold out. I disagree that he/she should go camping instead, as I don't personally like camping. But perhaps an extended several day vacation to some place 11:40 enjoys would be the best alternative.
Thanks Kari, Ryan or Gene at 2:32, ". . . cut them some slack. They work hard and have a lot of tasks–with apparently little appreciation for what they do." So quit! ROFL!
Who the he'll would Want to go to a convention with Bull@?
Damn autocorrect, yes I know there are typos in the above post.
This is 11:40. I had only a marginal interest in attending the Convention. However, since the SBN spends time and effort to fill up my mailbox, I thought I would at least see how much the State Bar believes is a reasonable amount of money to charge an attorney for 3 nights of lodging and seminars (after buying an airline ticket 2/3 of the way across the continent and transportation to get to the hotel).
The random audit issue is not dead. It did not pass this time because it was so poorly crafted and presented. It is likewise accompanied by numerous other poorly considered proposals (remember the proposed RPC on proper speech?)
To the Board Member who suggested that we should cut them some slack and give Board members all expense paid trips to Chicago because they show up once a month to eat Jason's Deli in secret, you are free to resign if the burden of service is too great.
There are no board members on this blog. But don't you think the paid vacation is a fair trade?
No. They get way more than that. They even endorse candidates.
Some get a member paid "Bar Presidents Wall of Fame" and all get their egos fed; their resumes burnished, and in their own minds, their career aspirations enhanced.
Don't I think a paid vacation is a fair trade? No! F*** no even. I think a free lunch for coming to the meeting is a fair trade. I have chaired one Board/Committee for the SBN. I chaired one of the Sections. I did not get a free vacation. I did not ask for a free vacation. I did not expect a free vacation. If you cannot handle being a Governor without a free vacation, then do not be a Governor.
I need a dog sitter, free. Will I get that if I run for BOG?
I think BOG lawyers pay there own way for trips. I know NJA board members pay to attend convention, pay for their own room and travel expenses.
So I read the Gamage pleadings which shows a REALLY big reason that Audits would be a disaster. The State Bar not only did not think anything about publishing private correspondence talking about mental health issues but published spreadsheets of all of the Gamages financial transactions. Those attorney/client privileged transactions between lawyers and clients? OBC has no problem publishing them after auditing your accounts, at least until it can be determined if they are confidential. Truly a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. I really thought better of Janeen than to pull this kind of garbage.
This is something that wouldn't have been so obvious, but for the random trust account audit proceedings. Now, I see this and think about all the privilege being violated by OBC by including that in a public filing. Enough is enough.
Does anybody know the significance of the Flemish, Rose Nylon law firm name dba of the Gamages' law firm?
Sounding..the name somebody says sounds like a company that assembles Ikea…still love that post.
What an absolute job. You could blow your brains out in front of OBC and they and Hardesty would not give a shit. This profession is heartless.
To be fair, they would file a Complaint because blowing your brains out is a violation of RPC 8.4(b). Hunterton and Hardesty would insist that disciplinary proceedings be undertaken and then seek disbarment when you did not answer the Complaint. Ask Asa Ginapp.
There are a bunch of socios at the OBC and NSC. There is no way that any confidential, HIPAA information should have been leaked on the Gamages. Get a good lawyer.
Some history: In 1983 or 1984, Justice Al Gunderson tackled bar reform and created a Study Committee. Out of that effort came a bunch of rules changes. Bar conventions had to be held in Nevada every other year, BOGs had term limits and the President had to be elected not just move through the chairs. People didn't want to go to bar conventions in Laughlin or Vegas and the other places didn't have accomodations. Eventually, the rules were changed back again.
This sounds like a member of the BOG justifying. So what if it didn't work in the 80s. Times have changed. Fees are probably 10x higher. We don't want to pay for boondoggles. If you have an annual meeting, make it accessible to the membership. The majority of the bar is in Las Vegas. At the very least, have it here and if people want to attend, they can. Plus, it is easily accessible from the rest of the state and there are plenty of rooms. There is no justification for having the annual meeting in Seattle, Austin, Chicago, etc.
I'm not suggesting that conventions must be held at the Exchange Club in Beatty, (although that might be fun) but if you want to go out of state, keep it somewhere close-in that people can easily get to or even drive if they want, e.g. San Diego, Newport Beach, etc. Or to say it another way: use a little common sense.
There used to be a pattern on a 3 year rotation: (1) inside Nevada; (2) outside Nevada but close (Monterey, Newport, San Francisco, San Diego) and (3) Hawaii. The Hawaii trip was justified because it would be well attended and people had three years to plan. If they wanted to have it in Sedona or Newport, people would not complain. But Chicago? That is insanity. People would (and do) go to Tahoe. People would (and do) go to Vegas or Reno. I am a member of the Bar in 4 states. No other Nevada has member-funded out of state boondoggles like Nevada.
The best Bar conventions I attended were at the Inn at Furnace Creek and in Monterey. The most successful conventions occur when the group is confined to a fairly small area, and they are forced to interact. Once we had a Bar convention in San Diego, and the group was all over the county, at Sea World, the zoo, or the beach. There was no feeling of community. That is just one reason Chicago was a poor choice. In Clark County we could always go to Lake Las Vegas, which would provide activities while keeping the group close together. The resorts at Lake Tahoe are also good choices. Keep it close, confined and inexpensive.
– E-files writ of execution for electronic issuance.
– Clerk's office drone rejects it because notice of execution is not attached to the writ.
– Looks at rejected document. Thumbs through 9 pages. Alas, pages 6-9: notice of execution.
– Resubmits entirely correct document with comment: Clerk–look at pages 6-9.
– Clerk's office drone rejects it again.
– Calls clerk.
– Clerk says: you have to attach the notice of execution as an attachment to the lead document.
– I calmly inform the clerk: the clerk's office disabled that feature in Odyssey some time ago and all published guidance from clerk's office says upload a single PDF with all attachments in that single PDF.
– Long period of silence on phone.
– Clerk's response: ooooohhhhhhh.
– Fully expecting the writ to be rejected for a few new reasons before some other drone finally accepts it.
Is it just me or is it time to downsize all of the redundant gatekeepers at the clerk's office.
-E-files Letters of Special Administration for Electronic Issuance.
-Twiddle my thumbs for 18-26 hours.
-Letters are issued.
–Uploads Tenant's Answer to Summary Eviction.
–Waits from Thursday until Tuesday morning with Answer in the queue. Tuesday is the 5th day of the 5 day notice
—Calls Clerk's Office to inquire what is going on; is told better high tail it down to the Clerk's Office and counter file the Answer because if the Complaint is counterfiled, the Summary Eviction will be granted (even though there is an Answer that will bear a date 5 calendar days earlier).
—Upon arriving at the Clerk's Office, summarily yelled at by the Clerk for counterfiling an Answer when it could have been e-filed from Attorney's Office. Calmly tell Clerk that there is one in the queue which has been there since Thursday. Clerk yells that they get to them when they get to them and throws unfiled Answer back at me.
Another satisfied customer, says the supervisor.
Now imagine doing this pro se.