We currently have 12 Circuit CoA. When the 9th member of the Court was added, we had 9 CoA. Sounds like it's time to split the 9th Circuit up into 4, and ensure one Supreme Court Justice per Circuit. 15 sounds nice. Some would even say it's the Constitutional Duty of the Congress to establish the Justices as quickly as possible. Mustn't wait, after all, the Court can't possible function with only 8, much less only 9!
I know right? The Senate did a great job at removing the effectiveness of a filibuster and that bit us in the ass. Maybe we can add more Supreme Court justices when Biden is elected next week so the GOP can do the same when the cycle turns back around and that can bite us in the ass just like all other major rule changes that we do to benefit us when we presently have the majority, before we lose it again (as always happens) and they use our rule changes against us. It's like both sides are opportunists and hypocrites.
Or sure let's do what Dems usually do – nothing. Be just like Biden to sit there with the Supreme Court doing a hard right for 30+ years. Now Kamala when she takes over that is where things change.
If McConnell has taught us anything, it's that, when in power, the GOP will change the rules to benefit them regardless of whether long-standing custom suggests a better course. I understand what you're saying: if we change the rules, those same changes will be used against us later. Except the current and future batches of Tea Party ignoramuses will change the rules anyway.
The Antifa loving Democrats will lose Congress, Senate, and Whitehouse next week. Then, with some luck, California secedes, and every last one of the leftwing crazies who came here from there return home, and Nevada yet again becomes great. Cross your fingers.
SCOTUS is finally 5-4 constitutionalist again. Another campaign promise fulfilled by the most promise fulfilling POTUS ever.
I just realized it has been over 80 years since we had a real SCOTUS. Oh, good Lord almighty, please let ACB be as solid as portrayed during confirmation.
"When will there be enough Justices on the Supreme Court?" "When 100% of the issues are decided in favor of the far left! The farthest extreme left! 50 if we have to! Keep 'em coming!" smh. Maybe we'll all get to be SCOTUS someday.
The Great One. The Savior of the Unborn. The Returner to Righteousness. The Slayer of Kelo. The Originalist in a Dress. THE ONE. THE ONLY. JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRET.
But in all seriousness, she is going to make a great judge.
She makes me feel inadequate as a lawyer in the best of ways. She will apply the law and not make policy. She's a Brainiac. She's pretty much one of the most qualified SCOTUS I've ever seen. So of course the left hates her. They want the SCOTUS to be another arm of the gov. God Bless America
All hail the new SCOTUS Justice — SWT! (Scalia With Tits)
Guest
Anonymous
October 27, 2020 4:40 pm
I'll be so glad to have this election behind us so we can get back to another failed impeachment attempt and/or a failed attempt to remove Trump under the 25th amendment and not actually get anything done in Congress for another four years.
Not if the Democrats lose the lower house. Some suggest the newly invigorated Republicans, now flying the banner of mighty Trump, starts impeaching leftwing judges across the land. Take down 20 or so, and suddenly the rest will remember that there is a legislative branch, an executive branch, and a judicial branch (not a supra-legislative-executive branch).
I'm 20 minutes in and already want to give up…Does Joe start asking any questions of substance?
Guest
Anonymous
October 27, 2020 6:01 pm
Serious question not related to politics. In family court, my client lives in CA and her ex filed in NV. I want to file a MTD for Lack of Jurisdiction. Do I include an Opposition in case I lose jurisdiction? Or do I wait for decision and then file Opposition. I don't want to miss a deadline for the opposition but I don't want to accidentally submit to jurisdiction either. Please help thank you.
11:01: if one of the couple lives in NV, NV has jurisdiction over the marriage. It might not have jurisdiction over various other issues (property located in CA, children if CA is the home state, etc.), but over the marriage itself, NV has jurisdiction based on one spouse's residence. So what is the basis for a motion to dismiss?
Tacking onto 12:03, this kind of issue has been well settled since Nevada had Divorce Ranches and Divorce Tourism in the 30s. If people lived in a state where a reason for divorce was required, or if the state made it hard for them to divorce, they moved here for 6 weeks, established jurisdiction, and dumped their spouse. Might not have jx for property division and child custody, but to get rid of a spouse? No question.
11:01 OP here – thank you for your help – they all lived in CA but he moved here for just a couple weeks and filed – so I know NV not have Jurisdiction under UCCJEA thus the MTD but I'm confused if I need to do an Opposition too bc 1) if I don't include with MTD and Judge doesn't see it my way I have no OPP but 2) if I include OPP I don't want to submit to NV jurisdiction "accidently" due to my ignorance – once again, please reard me for not talking about politics by helping me haha thanks again
your client should start the competing divorce proceedings in CA; in NV, file a motion to dismiss for lack of SMJ(seek OST). I would say opposition is optional until SMJ is first determined. I would also argue that dismissal of the NV divorce action is appropriate since CA is the state that must address custody and property issues and thus, forum non conveniens is applicable.
@11:01a – I know you probably mean 'Answer' when you're saying "Opposition" but those are terms of art. Of course there is no opposition to the complaint, unless the party in NV also filed a motion for temporary orders and you're talking about opposing that? If you're asking whether you have to file an Answer while you have a pending MTD, that would be No. Once the MTD is resolved either the case is gone and no answer required, or the case survives and you'd then need to file an answer.
Certainly not! Just because the President just signed an executive order essentially eliminating meritocracy in many career government positions, including the fucking Center for Disease Control, has installed Soviet-style Political Officers in order to prevent actual information from accidentally being given to the public, has pathologically lied to the American public, and has hawked snake oil, why would all of that mean that the next cure would be total bullshit if not actual toxic bullshit?
I'm in my 40's, no way will I get any COVID19 vaccine nor will I give it to my children. Would I want my parents to get it – possibly. If I had grandparents, yes I would want them to take it. In a few years if we still have COVID19 – I'll consider getting the vaccine. I get my yearly flu vaccine.
A dba is not an actual entity. The corp/llc/partnership is the entity. A dba is just a name. In my experience, you sue the entity, and can clarify in the caption that the entity is "dba Los Pollos Hermanos."
We currently have 12 Circuit CoA. When the 9th member of the Court was added, we had 9 CoA. Sounds like it's time to split the 9th Circuit up into 4, and ensure one Supreme Court Justice per Circuit. 15 sounds nice. Some would even say it's the Constitutional Duty of the Congress to establish the Justices as quickly as possible. Mustn't wait, after all, the Court can't possible function with only 8, much less only 9!
I know right? The Senate did a great job at removing the effectiveness of a filibuster and that bit us in the ass. Maybe we can add more Supreme Court justices when Biden is elected next week so the GOP can do the same when the cycle turns back around and that can bite us in the ass just like all other major rule changes that we do to benefit us when we presently have the majority, before we lose it again (as always happens) and they use our rule changes against us. It's like both sides are opportunists and hypocrites.
Or sure let's do what Dems usually do – nothing. Be just like Biden to sit there with the Supreme Court doing a hard right for 30+ years. Now Kamala when she takes over that is where things change.
9:43,
If McConnell has taught us anything, it's that, when in power, the GOP will change the rules to benefit them regardless of whether long-standing custom suggests a better course. I understand what you're saying: if we change the rules, those same changes will be used against us later. Except the current and future batches of Tea Party ignoramuses will change the rules anyway.
The Antifa loving Democrats will lose Congress, Senate, and Whitehouse next week. Then, with some luck, California secedes, and every last one of the leftwing crazies who came here from there return home, and Nevada yet again becomes great. Cross your fingers.
SCOTUS is finally 5-4 constitutionalist again. Another campaign promise fulfilled by the most promise fulfilling POTUS ever.
I just realized it has been over 80 years since we had a real SCOTUS. Oh, good Lord almighty, please let ACB be as solid as portrayed during confirmation.
11:26 Based. I think this will be the year Nevada goes red.
"When will there be enough Justices on the Supreme Court?" "When 100% of the issues are decided in favor of the far left! The farthest extreme left! 50 if we have to! Keep 'em coming!" smh. Maybe we'll all get to be SCOTUS someday.
The Great One. The Savior of the Unborn. The Returner to Righteousness. The Slayer of Kelo. The Originalist in a Dress. THE ONE. THE ONLY. JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRET.
But in all seriousness, she is going to make a great judge.
She makes me feel inadequate as a lawyer in the best of ways. She will apply the law and not make policy. She's a Brainiac. She's pretty much one of the most qualified SCOTUS I've ever seen. So of course the left hates her. They want the SCOTUS to be another arm of the gov. God Bless America
The eff is wrong with you?
All hail the new SCOTUS Justice — SWT! (Scalia With Tits)
I'll be so glad to have this election behind us so we can get back to another failed impeachment attempt and/or a failed attempt to remove Trump under the 25th amendment and not actually get anything done in Congress for another four years.
Not if the Democrats lose the lower house. Some suggest the newly invigorated Republicans, now flying the banner of mighty Trump, starts impeaching leftwing judges across the land. Take down 20 or so, and suddenly the rest will remember that there is a legislative branch, an executive branch, and a judicial branch (not a supra-legislative-executive branch).
Who is "some?"
Our Nevada Court of Appeals sucks, so the SCOTUS should suck too.
Yes.
Whaaa . . .?
Kanye was on Joe Rogan podcast for three hours. He should be president!
YES!
President of the Psych Ward Inmates
I'm 20 minutes in and already want to give up…Does Joe start asking any questions of substance?
Serious question not related to politics. In family court, my client lives in CA and her ex filed in NV. I want to file a MTD for Lack of Jurisdiction. Do I include an Opposition in case I lose jurisdiction? Or do I wait for decision and then file Opposition. I don't want to miss a deadline for the opposition but I don't want to accidentally submit to jurisdiction either. Please help thank you.
11:01: if one of the couple lives in NV, NV has jurisdiction over the marriage. It might not have jurisdiction over various other issues (property located in CA, children if CA is the home state, etc.), but over the marriage itself, NV has jurisdiction based on one spouse's residence. So what is the basis for a motion to dismiss?
Tacking onto 12:03, this kind of issue has been well settled since Nevada had Divorce Ranches and Divorce Tourism in the 30s. If people lived in a state where a reason for divorce was required, or if the state made it hard for them to divorce, they moved here for 6 weeks, established jurisdiction, and dumped their spouse. Might not have jx for property division and child custody, but to get rid of a spouse? No question.
11:01 OP here – thank you for your help – they all lived in CA but he moved here for just a couple weeks and filed – so I know NV not have Jurisdiction under UCCJEA thus the MTD but I'm confused if I need to do an Opposition too bc 1) if I don't include with MTD and Judge doesn't see it my way I have no OPP but 2) if I include OPP I don't want to submit to NV jurisdiction "accidently" due to my ignorance – once again, please reard me for not talking about politics by helping me haha thanks again
your client should start the competing divorce proceedings in CA; in NV, file a motion to dismiss for lack of SMJ(seek OST). I would say opposition is optional until SMJ is first determined. I would also argue that dismissal of the NV divorce action is appropriate since CA is the state that must address custody and property issues and thus, forum non conveniens is applicable.
@11:01a – I know you probably mean 'Answer' when you're saying "Opposition" but those are terms of art. Of course there is no opposition to the complaint, unless the party in NV also filed a motion for temporary orders and you're talking about opposing that? If you're asking whether you have to file an Answer while you have a pending MTD, that would be No. Once the MTD is resolved either the case is gone and no answer required, or the case survives and you'd then need to file an answer.
OMG, lawyers answering other lawyers' questions on the Blog about the law. What a novel concept! We should do it more; who knows, it could catch on.
*reward
No way I am getting the COVID vaccine. Not even an anti-vaxer necessarily, but the COVID vaccine just sounds sketch.
finally, another fan of I am Legend
Certainly not! Just because the President just signed an executive order essentially eliminating meritocracy in many career government positions, including the fucking Center for Disease Control, has installed Soviet-style Political Officers in order to prevent actual information from accidentally being given to the public, has pathologically lied to the American public, and has hawked snake oil, why would all of that mean that the next cure would be total bullshit if not actual toxic bullshit?
@ 3:55 only vaccine you need is for Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Side note: Only vaccine I would consider taking is Sputnik V.
I'm in my 40's, no way will I get any COVID19 vaccine nor will I give it to my children. Would I want my parents to get it – possibly. If I had grandparents, yes I would want them to take it. In a few years if we still have COVID19 – I'll consider getting the vaccine. I get my yearly flu vaccine.
This comment has been removed by the author.
@3:22 First thing I thought of when I heard about the vaccine is I am Legend.
Sisolak's days are numbered. Maybe he can work for a pharmaceutical company when he gets ousted in 2 yrs?
He'll be working for the DNC.
The comments on this blog just make me sad now. The internet is not the world. People are smarter than this. Blog is hijacked.
I have a corporate question, can you do a default if it is a dba, meaning one defendant answered but not the dba part of the defendant? Thank you!
Can you default the fictitious name of an entity, even though the actual entity has appeared?
A dba is not an actual entity. The corp/llc/partnership is the entity. A dba is just a name. In my experience, you sue the entity, and can clarify in the caption that the entity is "dba Los Pollos Hermanos."