- Quickdraw McLaw
- 7 Comments
- 710 Views
Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (Observed)! Although the courts are closed, we know more than a few firms that ignore this national holiday and keep the office open. For those of you in the office instead of out attending the parade, doing service, or shopping for great deals on furniture, here are a few items to discuss:
- You can view the final list of people who registered to be a judicial candidate here. To borrow the words of the RJ, the two Supreme Court justices and 21 Clark County District Court judges who drew no challengers should be celebrating their “free ride.” What do you think? Any big surprises? Anything more inexplicable than Ross Smillie withdrawing from running against Jessie Walsh (where he at least had a chance) to against Michael Villani (where has practically no chance)? Is there really a method to the madness into which departments the family court candidates decided to file? Any incumbents that you think should start packing their bags now?
- Here’s a carefully crafted piece on Attorney General candidate Adam Laxalt and his past drinking problem. This is his first campaign, but it seems like he already knows the dance.
- News Flash. Lawyers have made a home downtown. A punny lede for an article about one of our legal community’s proudest features: Lawyer’s Row (houses). [Vegas Inc.]
- A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling means that bloggers get the same First Amendment protection as journalists when sued for defamation. [RJ]
- DREAM JOB ALERT! Well, at least for some of you. The Nevada Athletic Commission is looking for a new executive director after its previous one steps down to return to the practice of law. [Unclassified Job Announcement]
Very surprised Vegas wasn't mentioned here:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/19/us/lawyer-suicides/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews
We've certainly had our share.
why do the judges who get slammed in the Judge the Judges report,not have more opponents? Plus the newest department judges shouldn't get a free ride.
Good questions. It makes no sense to me. I see people saying stuff about fundraising abilities, but cannot for the life of me think of a reason why at least one person wouldn't run against those two specific groups of judges.
This has a very easy answer: the pay/job is not worth the money and effort it takes to run and win. If the judicial pay doubled or was in the quarter-million/year range, I guarantee you would have very qualified and respected attorneys running for every single seat.
I think it's an aboslute violation of the judicial ethics to accept money from lawyers who may appear before you. And as the Supreme Court teaches, writing checks is free speech, so you can't prevent them from doing so. And yes, I know the judicial ethics rules allows for exceptions when running for office in regards to the ethical obligations of a judicial officer. But like a (C)constituion that is internally incosistent, it would be logical to find that the duty to appear unbiased trumps the sections that allows judges to run for office.
How about Chris Rasmussen? Registering, then withdrawing, from not one but two judicial races, before settling on a third. Seems kind of "off" to me.
I like Chris.