The Supreme Court of Nevada denied a request seeking body cam footage from an arrest involving the son of AG Aaron Ford. [RJ; nvcourts]
Ex-Metro officer’s child sex case moved over objections of Laughlin Justice of the Peace. [RJ]
LACSN announced it is using $707,000 from an unnamed legal settlement to provide emergency housing assistance to HELP of Southern Nevada. [Nevada Current]
Tomorrow is the Nevada caucus. Will it be over by Saturday night or will it be a repeat of Iowa? How many lawsuits will be filed as a result?
If lawsuits includes recall filings, I'm taking the over. Just like Hansel, it's so hot right now.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 5:15 pm
Hey, Aaron Ford case. Ruled in favor of another politician. But Danny Tarkanian got screwed. Anybody else, they would have ruled differently. Keep up the good work, NSC.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 5:37 pm
Even if the body cam footage regarding the arrest of Aaron Ford's young son could be released, it's obviously being requested for a bullsh** scummy political purpose.
Let's say his son was 18, and thus technically no longer a juvenile, and thus let's say the footage was released to this political activist group, then what happens? What happens is they would use it to argue some nonsense like "How can Aaron Ford be in a critical law enforcement positon if he can't even keep his own house in order?"
That simplistic, myopic approach may seem reasonable to some people, but not to me. First, it's apparently a minor juvenile offense, and juveniles from all homes(those with good parenting and those with not so good parenting) can and will get into trouble considering intense peer pressure and their minds are still only partially formed, etc. This mantra about it all comes down to parenting totally ignores the real life complexity and nuance of these matters.
Yes,many juvenile offenses are due to a lack of sufficient parenting and supervision. But sometimes there is very firm and appropriate parenting, and the children rebel from what they perceive as being too strict.
Both political parties nauseate me when they dig at any little family matter and try to use it to destroy their political opponent. And both parties are equally guilty of this. In fact, in many election years the democrats are more scummy with this approach than their republican counterparts.
Aaron Ford himself has policies and approaches which can certainly be challenged and attacked by his opponents. Plus, he himself, during his adult life, seemed to acquire some baggage that could be used against him–baggage which in most years probably would have prevented him being elected(in my view) but he and the others rode the giant blue wave where the democrats virtually swept all the state-wide positons.
But is it asking too much to expect some degree of decorum and restraint as to family matters?
Yes, it is asking too much. See, e.g., Yevgeny Vindman, non-flattering photos of Ted Cruz's wife, Rafael Cruz's involvement in the JFK assassination, FDR's dog Fala.
Anything for Eglet, I mean Aaron Ford. His past criminal record. We don't care. At least 200k in taxes paid off, probably by Eglet. The fact that he has no basic understanding if criminal law. We don't care. We'll elect bc he is a Democrat. Vote for anyone Dem. We don't care that his son allegedly batters women, elect him as AG.
10:50, that's a nice sentiment. It's also wrong. The public pays for plenty of records that aren't subject to the NPRA. Read NRS 239.010. It specifically lists NRS 62H.025 as an exception to the public records act. Pretty simple, actually.
To 11:01 AM. I used to be an independent who voted based on who I thought the best person for the job was. I often voted for Republicans because I am fiscally conservative and really do believe that people ought to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Unfortunately, the Trump/McConnell facist and treasonous version of the GOP caused me to change my registration to Democrat, and as it currently stands I will never vote for another Republican. Anyone willing to proclaim themselves part of that club is out as far as I'm concerned. A spine is a terrible thing to waste. I'll vote for any and every Democrat over any and every Republican from here on out, every time.
The video footage might possibly show some "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Justice" if Ford used his political clout to cause criminal charges not to be brought to bear against the juveniles involved. I am not going to condemn Ford for the fact that his kid got in trouble. But did he violate ethical rules in dealing with the cops on the scene?
Corruption is so ingrained in every aspect of government from the CCSD to the U.S. Supreme Court that the current cultural attitude of complete apathy, beyond meaningless tweets and meaningless social media posts, undoubtedly will eventually culminate in civil unrest towards localized and regional areas of civil war.
It's not whether but, when and where.
Thomas Jefferson …"The tree of liberty…
As a non-registered Democrat or Republican, I have no interest in voting for any representative of either party.
Nevada and it's 6 electoral votes are going for the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2020 period.
As long as the King/Queen strangle the Great State of Nevada from the true State Capitol French Provisional building on 7th Street, nothing is going to change that!
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 6:01 pm
9:37–yes,it is asking too much to expect people,in the shark-infested political waters, to honor some degree of restraint and decorum as to family matters.
I understand your point but it is now totally unrealistic and naïve for a candidate to say something like,as they sometimes do, "Attack me all you want, but leave my family out of it."
If an opponent thinks they can gain some yardage attacking your family, they can and will. And when they do, the candidate or politician whose family is attacked is well-served not to act indignant and ferociously protective of their family.
For example, whatever anyone thinks of Bill Clinton, when his wife was attacked he did not act angry and insist he was going to defend her supposed "honor" and all that bunk. Instead, he would just kind of smile and say she's tough enough to fight her own battles.
The candidates, as well as their families, need to be real thick-skinned when these attacks on family occur. If they can't be, then they are well-served to stay out of politics.
Students of recent U.S. History will note that in 1972, Edmund Muskie, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President, handled such a matter very poorly, as candidates often do.
Some newspaper had attacked Muskie in their columns and editorial pages, but also expanded the net to include Muskie's wife. Muskie called a press conference to express his rage and indignation. When discussing the attacks on his wife, he became so angry, offended, and so hurt that he chocked up, his eyes watered up, and some tears seemed to appear on his cheeks.
If he were not seeking to be the leader of the Free World, people may have understood and related to his reaction.
That press conference ended his campaign. People allowed that his reaction was natural and totally understandable, that they may have reacted the same way themselves, but they don't want someone leading our country who cries when his wife is criticized.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 6:08 pm
10:01, I know I am dating myself here but I remember that Ed Muskie press conference in '72.
I was in the seventh grade, and I saw it replayed on the news and remember my parents saying exactly what you just said, i.e. that it is good and honorable that he defended his wife, but once he cried that pretty much disqualifies him form being presidential material.
Now what is a candidate cried, but not about a personal attack on their spouse, but something like children being killed in some school shooting tragedy, or something similar? That, to my mind, would be a lot more understandable.
Better opportunity
More money/benefits
More life balance
Asshole coworkers/boss
Shitty practice area
Shitty location
Because it's what you want to do and asking for legitimate reasons on an anonymous internet blog isn't going to change your mind. Do it.
When I left my original firm that I started with after my clerkship, the main partner I worked with was pissed, but not in an asshole way. It was more about how my leaving impacted his practice. Even though he didn't really take it out on me, his reaction made me feel like I made the right decision. The partnership is concerned with the profitability of the partnership, not about what's best for you.
If you are trying to justify the decision to yourself, the list of legitimate reasons is unlimited. It ultimately boils down to the simple reason of you do not want to continue working at that job/employer for any reason (or no reason).
The bigger issue, and ultimately more important question is what you tell others, including potential employers (if you leave before you have your next job in place) as to the reason why you left the prior job. That requires far more thought and a nuanced response.
Volunteered this past week for a day even though Hardesty tried to take my license away. I think I am nuts.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 8:55 pm
Leave the first firm because you are miserable and curious. Totally cool and acceptable. But if you leave the second/third/fourth firm because you're still miserable, you're probably just an a$$hole. Or maybe you are not cut out to be a lawyer. Either way, go teach, bitch about your student loans, and vote for socialists.
How about leaving firms until you figure out that law firms inherently suck as places to work – the atmosphere, the politics, the inflated egos and constant preening, the hideous staff person(s) that you can't fire, the backstabbing, your partners pulling crap behind your back that you, as a partner, wind up being on the hook for. You name it. I left that behind a few years ago, and even though it's a rocky road as a solo, I can't conceive of going back.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 9:26 pm
I am feeling sorry for the Kolesar Leatham employees who are losing their jobs. Partners you may have been blindsided, probably not. I still hope those innocent find new jobs soon.
We are the innocents and NO, we have not found new jobs. We certainly have been showing up for work everyday during this period of limbo. Any good firms looking for excellent employees, you know where to find us. Thank you.
I will create an email like 5:12. Kolesar people can send a resume without fear of repercussions because lets be honest–they aren't going to double lay you off.
@4:54 There are no "innocents" in the legal profession
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 11:08 pm
"The Nevada Supreme Court/Court of Appeals courthouse in downtown Las Vegas will be named for Justice James Hardesty."
So now the Hardesty Palace will vie with the Eglet Palace for tastelessness!
4:37 gets the piss I mean post of the day. You get the first piss, buddy.
Guest
Anonymous
February 21, 2020 11:36 pm
I vote for naming the sewer that runs under the 215 by Warm Springs: "The OBC Shi*show Tunnel" and the little whole trap with a screen where toilet paper n scummy putrid decaying crud rots: "The Hooge Drain"
3:36, So this sewer and screen trap near 215/Warm Springs is where you go to find understanding for the fact that you chose chose to be an attorney?
Lawyers are all losers!
Guest
Anonymous
February 22, 2020 1:12 am
Kolesar folks (or others)- if you are looking for a job send your resume or letter to lvlegaljobs@gmail.com. Looking to hire in roughly the same geographic area.
Caucus will be over Saturday night. Over and under on lawsuits is 2.5.
If lawsuits includes recall filings, I'm taking the over. Just like Hansel, it's so hot right now.
Hey, Aaron Ford case. Ruled in favor of another politician. But Danny Tarkanian got screwed. Anybody else, they would have ruled differently. Keep up the good work, NSC.
Even if the body cam footage regarding the arrest of Aaron Ford's young son could be released, it's obviously being requested for a bullsh** scummy political purpose.
Let's say his son was 18, and thus technically no longer a juvenile, and thus let's say the footage was released to this political activist group, then what happens? What happens is they would use it to argue some nonsense like "How can Aaron Ford be in a critical law enforcement positon if he can't even keep his own house in order?"
That simplistic, myopic approach may seem reasonable to some people, but not to me. First, it's apparently a minor juvenile offense, and juveniles from all homes(those with good parenting and those with not so good parenting) can and will get into trouble considering intense peer pressure and their minds are still only partially formed, etc. This mantra about it all comes down to parenting totally ignores the real life complexity and nuance of these matters.
Yes,many juvenile offenses are due to a lack of sufficient parenting and supervision. But sometimes there is very firm and appropriate parenting, and the children rebel from what they perceive as being too strict.
Both political parties nauseate me when they dig at any little family matter and try to use it to destroy their political opponent. And both parties are equally guilty of this. In fact, in many election years the democrats are more scummy with this approach than their republican counterparts.
Aaron Ford himself has policies and approaches which can certainly be challenged and attacked by his opponents. Plus, he himself, during his adult life, seemed to acquire some baggage that could be used against him–baggage which in most years probably would have prevented him being elected(in my view) but he and the others rode the giant blue wave where the democrats virtually swept all the state-wide positons.
But is it asking too much to expect some degree of decorum and restraint as to family matters?
Yes, it is asking too much. See, e.g., Yevgeny Vindman, non-flattering photos of Ted Cruz's wife, Rafael Cruz's involvement in the JFK assassination, FDR's dog Fala.
You know that dog has its own statue at the FDR Memorial
Those videos are public. The public pays for them. Sorry, NSC an attorney is telling you got this one wrong.
Anything for Eglet, I mean Aaron Ford. His past criminal record. We don't care. At least 200k in taxes paid off, probably by Eglet. The fact that he has no basic understanding if criminal law. We don't care. We'll elect bc he is a Democrat. Vote for anyone Dem. We don't care that his son allegedly batters women, elect him as AG.
10:50, that's a nice sentiment. It's also wrong. The public pays for plenty of records that aren't subject to the NPRA. Read NRS 239.010. It specifically lists NRS 62H.025 as an exception to the public records act. Pretty simple, actually.
So now public records are not public records? Jesus Christ. Lawyers can have a field Fay with this ruling.
Day
The exceptions under NRS 239.010 have been around for a looooooong time. This isn't new.
To 11:01 AM. I used to be an independent who voted based on who I thought the best person for the job was. I often voted for Republicans because I am fiscally conservative and really do believe that people ought to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Unfortunately, the Trump/McConnell facist and treasonous version of the GOP caused me to change my registration to Democrat, and as it currently stands I will never vote for another Republican. Anyone willing to proclaim themselves part of that club is out as far as I'm concerned. A spine is a terrible thing to waste. I'll vote for any and every Democrat over any and every Republican from here on out, every time.
"fascist" I meant.
I only declare demo to vote early. I can vote either way, depending on the candidate. I voted for Ford's opponent. Ford has no biz being Ag.
2:28 just know that for every one of you, I will gather 10 more votes for MAGA 2020, I convert your hatred to love and use it as fuel
The video footage might possibly show some "Abuse of Power" and "Obstruction of Justice" if Ford used his political clout to cause criminal charges not to be brought to bear against the juveniles involved. I am not going to condemn Ford for the fact that his kid got in trouble. But did he violate ethical rules in dealing with the cops on the scene?
Corruption is so ingrained in every aspect of government from the CCSD to the U.S. Supreme Court that the current cultural attitude of complete apathy, beyond meaningless tweets and meaningless social media posts, undoubtedly will eventually culminate in civil unrest towards localized and regional areas of civil war.
It's not whether but, when and where.
Thomas Jefferson …"The tree of liberty…
As a non-registered Democrat or Republican, I have no interest in voting for any representative of either party.
Nevada and it's 6 electoral votes are going for the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2020 period.
As long as the King/Queen strangle the Great State of Nevada from the true State Capitol French Provisional building on 7th Street, nothing is going to change that!
9:37–yes,it is asking too much to expect people,in the shark-infested political waters, to honor some degree of restraint and decorum as to family matters.
I understand your point but it is now totally unrealistic and naïve for a candidate to say something like,as they sometimes do, "Attack me all you want, but leave my family out of it."
If an opponent thinks they can gain some yardage attacking your family, they can and will. And when they do, the candidate or politician whose family is attacked is well-served not to act indignant and ferociously protective of their family.
For example, whatever anyone thinks of Bill Clinton, when his wife was attacked he did not act angry and insist he was going to defend her supposed "honor" and all that bunk. Instead, he would just kind of smile and say she's tough enough to fight her own battles.
The candidates, as well as their families, need to be real thick-skinned when these attacks on family occur. If they can't be, then they are well-served to stay out of politics.
Students of recent U.S. History will note that in 1972, Edmund Muskie, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President, handled such a matter very poorly, as candidates often do.
Some newspaper had attacked Muskie in their columns and editorial pages, but also expanded the net to include Muskie's wife. Muskie called a press conference to express his rage and indignation. When discussing the attacks on his wife, he became so angry, offended, and so hurt that he chocked up, his eyes watered up, and some tears seemed to appear on his cheeks.
If he were not seeking to be the leader of the Free World, people may have understood and related to his reaction.
That press conference ended his campaign. People allowed that his reaction was natural and totally understandable, that they may have reacted the same way themselves, but they don't want someone leading our country who cries when his wife is criticized.
10:01, I know I am dating myself here but I remember that Ed Muskie press conference in '72.
I was in the seventh grade, and I saw it replayed on the news and remember my parents saying exactly what you just said, i.e. that it is good and honorable that he defended his wife, but once he cried that pretty much disqualifies him form being presidential material.
Now what is a candidate cried, but not about a personal attack on their spouse, but something like children being killed in some school shooting tragedy, or something similar? That, to my mind, would be a lot more understandable.
See Andrew Yang
What are some legitimate reasons for leaving a firm?
As many reasons as there are for them to fire you in an at-will state
Why leave a firm? Why not?
Better opportunity
More money/benefits
More life balance
Asshole coworkers/boss
Shitty practice area
Shitty location
Because it's what you want to do and asking for legitimate reasons on an anonymous internet blog isn't going to change your mind. Do it.
Really there is only one legitimate reason. Wanting a different job more. Simple. You do you.
When I left my original firm that I started with after my clerkship, the main partner I worked with was pissed, but not in an asshole way. It was more about how my leaving impacted his practice. Even though he didn't really take it out on me, his reaction made me feel like I made the right decision. The partnership is concerned with the profitability of the partnership, not about what's best for you.
Your question can be read in more than one way…
If you are trying to justify the decision to yourself, the list of legitimate reasons is unlimited. It ultimately boils down to the simple reason of you do not want to continue working at that job/employer for any reason (or no reason).
The bigger issue, and ultimately more important question is what you tell others, including potential employers (if you leave before you have your next job in place) as to the reason why you left the prior job. That requires far more thought and a nuanced response.
It is better to serve than be served; it is better to give than receiver; it is better to bill a lot of hours than have a life. Stay. Serve. Slave.
Volunteered this past week for a day even though Hardesty tried to take my license away. I think I am nuts.
Leave the first firm because you are miserable and curious. Totally cool and acceptable. But if you leave the second/third/fourth firm because you're still miserable, you're probably just an a$$hole. Or maybe you are not cut out to be a lawyer. Either way, go teach, bitch about your student loans, and vote for socialists.
How about leaving firms until you figure out that law firms inherently suck as places to work – the atmosphere, the politics, the inflated egos and constant preening, the hideous staff person(s) that you can't fire, the backstabbing, your partners pulling crap behind your back that you, as a partner, wind up being on the hook for. You name it. I left that behind a few years ago, and even though it's a rocky road as a solo, I can't conceive of going back.
I am feeling sorry for the Kolesar Leatham employees who are losing their jobs. Partners you may have been blindsided, probably not. I still hope those innocent find new jobs soon.
We are the innocents and NO, we have not found new jobs. We certainly have been showing up for work everyday during this period of limbo. Any good firms looking for excellent employees, you know where to find us. Thank you.
Actually you raise a good point. If you are a Kolesar staff member, our firm is hiring.
Anonymous at 5:01 PM, put your firm name on here then.
I will create an email like 5:12. Kolesar people can send a resume without fear of repercussions because lets be honest–they aren't going to double lay you off.
@4:54 There are no "innocents" in the legal profession
"The Nevada Supreme Court/Court of Appeals courthouse in downtown Las Vegas will be named for Justice James Hardesty."
So now the Hardesty Palace will vie with the Eglet Palace for tastelessness!
Don't forget the Taj Ma-Oscar.
Please tell me this is a joke. Please, I beg of you.
Hardesty Strip Joint, the place where dem politicians are protected; and the place where small law firms are incinerated and tee-peed.
How soon does he get a statue out front?
Hardesty gets the fountain for you to piss in.
4:37 gets the piss I mean post of the day. You get the first piss, buddy.
I vote for naming the sewer that runs under the 215 by Warm Springs: "The OBC Shi*show Tunnel" and the little whole trap with a screen where toilet paper n scummy putrid decaying crud rots: "The Hooge Drain"
As long as there is a place for you to take a shit in honor of Hooge's legal brillance.
3:36, So this sewer and screen trap near 215/Warm Springs is where you go to find understanding for the fact that you chose chose to be an attorney?
Lawyers are all losers!
Kolesar folks (or others)- if you are looking for a job send your resume or letter to lvlegaljobs@gmail.com. Looking to hire in roughly the same geographic area.