Nevada Supreme Court says state cannot change water rights for “public trust.” [TNI]
The COVID-19 task force voted to open all bars in Nevada, including Clark County, effective Monday. The task force did not take up the issue of the 50-person limit for churches or for resumption of youth sports. [TNI]
Five people face federal charges for vandalizing the federal courthouse during protests earlier this year. [Las Vegas Sun]
The founder and CEO of Las Vegas based cyberfraud prevention company NS8 was arrested and charged for securities and wire fraud. [Justice.gov]
Sparks props up eviction mediation while the Supreme Court gets ready for a hearing next week to draft the eviction mediation rules. [Nevada Current]
Former Governor Sandoval has been named President of UNR–giving hope to all those federal judges out there looking for a cushy landing spot. [Las Vegas Sun]
By the authority of this blog, I deny Sandoval his newly appointed UNR position and require him to immediately report to the Governor's mansion and reoccupy that office.
That's the most beautiful daydream. Warm fuzzes. I did not vote for Sisolak but I never believed he would be this much of a disaster. I felt he would be moderate and think of our state first. He's not and he does not. Horrible.
The early announcement suggests an OML violation. Such a violation would make the action void under NRS 241.036.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 4:48 pm
There was discussion on yesterday's blog about the judicial complaints against four different judges. The sense was that three of the four complaints had apparent validity, to varying degrees, but that the one against Judge Earley was unjustified.
She is accused of raising her voice and using profanity, on a couple isolated occasions detailed in the complaint, during interactions with the Chief Judge, as well as support staff. All this is of course out of the presence of the public.
I am not taking up for this particular judge, and find it very unprofessional and inappropriate if she did behave in such fashion. But is this really something that the commission(which is designed to address serious judicial corruption and dishonesty) should be dealing with?
It all sounds like something which should have been handled internally, with a little bit of genuine leadership, p.r. skills, and problem solving, rather than being unduly thin-skinned and running to the Commission. It all just sounds like a really disproportionate response. Like using a five pound sledge hammer to kill a fly(okay…poor analogy).
And now tens of thousands of dollars of money needs to spent on this situation, by an agency which claims to have a very small and totally inadequate budget.
Of course we should not tolerate judges cussing and yelling at colleagues and staff, but is this really the most effective and proportionate way of dealing with something like this?
Does not sound like some serious ethical violation to me, but perhaps the answer lies in the back story of which I am not privy. Perhaps she just got on the wrong side of the wrong people.
My sense reading the complaint is that there were some thin-skinned, sensitive people working for her. Who here has met an attorney who hasn't raised their voice? She didn't get where she is by being sunshine and rainbows all the time, she gets things done and doesn't tolerate bs. That judicial commission complaint is bunk, just thrashing the legacy of a smart, accomplished, and fair judge.
9:48 and 10:58 differ in that 9:48 thinks that we should have very low tolerance for screaming judges, while 10:58 views being exposed to such judicial behavior as an inevitable, occasional, occupational hazard of having a career in the legal system.
But they both agree that this in no way constitutes some serious ethical violation, that a complaint should never have been filed, and I join them in that view.
Even some of Judge Earley's harshest critics think this is bogus. Pursue true judicial corruption and serious dishonesty–not some soon-to-be retired judge raising her voice and using profanity(none of it, by the way, in the presence of the public).
I wonder if this is an Al Capone situation. Meaning, just like they couldn't get capone for anything and so they went for tax evasion, there may be other issues or vendettas that they are pursuing here and so they drug out these random incidents. I agree, this seems inappropriate.
10:58: Yikes. I have met plenty of lawyers who get through the day (every day) without raising their voice or being unnecessarily harsh. You can be successful and get ahead while still treating people in a dignified way. I realize that previous generations don't see it this way, and see behaviors like that as some strange show of strength, but it's 2020, and I for one am glad we expect more from people.
I agree with 1:47. I always see yelling/harsh behavior as a show of weakness. Why would someone think a tantrum is a show of strength? Pathetic.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 4:53 pm
Speaking of improper, belligerent judicial behavior, what do you suggest doing when a judge is yelling at you or doing improper things at a hearing? A king for a Cali attorney.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 4:55 pm
I would note on the record the impropiety, and if it gets intolerable, I will leave.
Leaving is a bad idea. Make sure there is a record and take the abuse by politely maintaining your record, remain professional and then seek recourse after. You will not serve your client or yourself if you walk out on any judge.
I get your point, but you think taking abuse by a bad acting judge is going to persuade them to rule in your favor? I don't. The only thing to keep me there is to maintain record.
A judge should not yell at an attorney, period. The worse I will take from a judge is that. You do worse than that then I submit my motions and leave. You don't have to take abuse.
In fairness to judges, I have seen them take a lot of abuse. And for the record: as incredibly shallow and dumb as many of these clowns are, most of them have dockets from hell and work hard to keep the wheels of justice turning, so if they lose their shit once in a while, grow a pair and deal with it.
It's one thing if a judge gets slammed with ridiculous attorneys/parties who are acting like idiots in court and the judge raises their voice. It's another if a judge consistently abuses those that appear in front of them. Nothing gets done, the facts get lost in the insanity, and the case becomes a rolling disaster.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 4:56 pm
Asking
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 5:28 pm
9:48–and the prosecution is even more pointless when we consider she will be retired by the time this matter is heard.
9:53–the only observation I can make about that matter is that if it is ever pursued in any fashion that you provide the hearing video to the agency in question(as opposed to merely relaying on transcript) and that your written materials urge them to view the video you provide so they can get the full nature and effect of matters.
After all, sometimes it's not so much what a judge says, but how they say it.
A transcript can only convey the exact words and phraseology a judge used, but screaming and yelling cannot be conveyed by a written transcript.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 5:28 pm
U will leave court in the middle of a hearing with a mad judge? Nooooooo
Leaving the Courtroom in the middle of a hearing with a Judge who is out of control? Perhaps the worst idea that I have heard in a very very long time on this Blog. Just because you decide to leave your beating does not mean that the beating is going to stop.
I agree, I like the hot bench analogy. Stay and take the abuse, it is good for you if you are person who is the target of the abuse. Just keep your calm, appeal.
Guest
Anonymous
September 18, 2020 5:39 pm
Agree with 10:28.
Also, as to 9:53, whether someone should take action against a belligerent, screeching judge is a situational question.
I saw a judge screaming at an attorney merely because the attorney persisted in advancing a legal point the judge continued to disagree with. That seemed like very unacceptable behavior on the part of the judge.
A few months later I saw the same judge scream to about the same degree and effect that he had in that earlier case. But this time he was dressing down an apparently negligent attorney who was not working a case, not cooperating with discovery, all of which caused continuances of trial and increased expenses, etc.
The court(during its yelling) made it clear that such(the case neglect and undue delay) was an intolerable situation as the Plaintiff was 87 and in deteriorating health and badly needed to get his case resolved. So, if an attorney seems to be causing undue delays, and is neglecting the case to a large extent, in a situation like that, and gets yelled at, I don't believe the attorney is prudent to pursue the judge for screaming at him/her.
And oh hell, here we go…
According to this, not her last words, but shortly before her death, Justice Ginsburg dictated a statement including that "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new President is installed." https://twitter.com/DaviSusan/status/1307100364198612993
Shoot, I've had a judge get mad at me for the way I was looking back at the judge however the last thing I would ever do is leave. In addition to admitting defeat, you've done a grave disservice to your client…
By the authority of this blog, I deny Sandoval his newly appointed UNR position and require him to immediately report to the Governor's mansion and reoccupy that office.
That's the most beautiful daydream. Warm fuzzes. I did not vote for Sisolak but I never believed he would be this much of a disaster. I felt he would be moderate and think of our state first. He's not and he does not. Horrible.
Don't worry. Sandoval will be back on the job market in a few months.
I wonder if, by the authority of the Open Meeting Law, he will be denied his UNR position. They sent the announcement out before the Board of Regents voted. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/ex-gov-sandoval-appointed-by-regents-as-next-unr-president
The early announcement suggests an OML violation. Such a violation would make the action void under NRS 241.036.
There was discussion on yesterday's blog about the judicial complaints against four different judges. The sense was that three of the four complaints had apparent validity, to varying degrees, but that the one against Judge Earley was unjustified.
She is accused of raising her voice and using profanity, on a couple isolated occasions detailed in the complaint, during interactions with the Chief Judge, as well as support staff. All this is of course out of the presence of the public.
I am not taking up for this particular judge, and find it very unprofessional and inappropriate if she did behave in such fashion. But is this really something that the commission(which is designed to address serious judicial corruption and dishonesty) should be dealing with?
It all sounds like something which should have been handled internally, with a little bit of genuine leadership, p.r. skills, and problem solving, rather than being unduly thin-skinned and running to the Commission. It all just sounds like a really disproportionate response. Like using a five pound sledge hammer to kill a fly(okay…poor analogy).
And now tens of thousands of dollars of money needs to spent on this situation, by an agency which claims to have a very small and totally inadequate budget.
Of course we should not tolerate judges cussing and yelling at colleagues and staff, but is this really the most effective and proportionate way of dealing with something like this?
Does not sound like some serious ethical violation to me, but perhaps the answer lies in the back story of which I am not privy. Perhaps she just got on the wrong side of the wrong people.
My sense reading the complaint is that there were some thin-skinned, sensitive people working for her. Who here has met an attorney who hasn't raised their voice? She didn't get where she is by being sunshine and rainbows all the time, she gets things done and doesn't tolerate bs. That judicial commission complaint is bunk, just thrashing the legacy of a smart, accomplished, and fair judge.
9:48 and 10:58 differ in that 9:48 thinks that we should have very low tolerance for screaming judges, while 10:58 views being exposed to such judicial behavior as an inevitable, occasional, occupational hazard of having a career in the legal system.
But they both agree that this in no way constitutes some serious ethical violation, that a complaint should never have been filed, and I join them in that view.
Even some of Judge Earley's harshest critics think this is bogus. Pursue true judicial corruption and serious dishonesty–not some soon-to-be retired judge raising her voice and using profanity(none of it, by the way, in the presence of the public).
I wonder if this is an Al Capone situation. Meaning, just like they couldn't get capone for anything and so they went for tax evasion, there may be other issues or vendettas that they are pursuing here and so they drug out these random incidents. I agree, this seems inappropriate.
10:58: Yikes. I have met plenty of lawyers who get through the day (every day) without raising their voice or being unnecessarily harsh. You can be successful and get ahead while still treating people in a dignified way. I realize that previous generations don't see it this way, and see behaviors like that as some strange show of strength, but it's 2020, and I for one am glad we expect more from people.
I agree with 1:47. I always see yelling/harsh behavior as a show of weakness. Why would someone think a tantrum is a show of strength? Pathetic.
Speaking of improper, belligerent judicial behavior, what do you suggest doing when a judge is yelling at you or doing improper things at a hearing? A king for a Cali attorney.
I would note on the record the impropiety, and if it gets intolerable, I will leave.
Leaving is a bad idea. Make sure there is a record and take the abuse by politely maintaining your record, remain professional and then seek recourse after. You will not serve your client or yourself if you walk out on any judge.
Exactly right 10:29
I get your point, but you think taking abuse by a bad acting judge is going to persuade them to rule in your favor? I don't. The only thing to keep me there is to maintain record.
Hot bench is good for you. Stay and say duck you in your head. I only leave if my safety is threatened or racist comments made to your client.
Fuck. If you can only get a transcript, not the yelling on the record.
A judge should not yell at an attorney, period. The worse I will take from a judge is that. You do worse than that then I submit my motions and leave. You don't have to take abuse.
In fairness to judges, I have seen them take a lot of abuse. And for the record: as incredibly shallow and dumb as many of these clowns are, most of them have dockets from hell and work hard to keep the wheels of justice turning, so if they lose their shit once in a while, grow a pair and deal with it.
It's one thing if a judge gets slammed with ridiculous attorneys/parties who are acting like idiots in court and the judge raises their voice. It's another if a judge consistently abuses those that appear in front of them. Nothing gets done, the facts get lost in the insanity, and the case becomes a rolling disaster.
Asking
9:48–and the prosecution is even more pointless when we consider she will be retired by the time this matter is heard.
9:53–the only observation I can make about that matter is that if it is ever pursued in any fashion that you provide the hearing video to the agency in question(as opposed to merely relaying on transcript) and that your written materials urge them to view the video you provide so they can get the full nature and effect of matters.
After all, sometimes it's not so much what a judge says, but how they say it.
A transcript can only convey the exact words and phraseology a judge used, but screaming and yelling cannot be conveyed by a written transcript.
U will leave court in the middle of a hearing with a mad judge? Nooooooo
Leaving the Courtroom in the middle of a hearing with a Judge who is out of control? Perhaps the worst idea that I have heard in a very very long time on this Blog. Just because you decide to leave your beating does not mean that the beating is going to stop.
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Has ANYONE EVER left a hearing b/c the judge was yelling at them? I think not.
I agree, I like the hot bench analogy. Stay and take the abuse, it is good for you if you are person who is the target of the abuse. Just keep your calm, appeal.
Agree with 10:28.
Also, as to 9:53, whether someone should take action against a belligerent, screeching judge is a situational question.
I saw a judge screaming at an attorney merely because the attorney persisted in advancing a legal point the judge continued to disagree with. That seemed like very unacceptable behavior on the part of the judge.
A few months later I saw the same judge scream to about the same degree and effect that he had in that earlier case. But this time he was dressing down an apparently negligent attorney who was not working a case, not cooperating with discovery, all of which caused continuances of trial and increased expenses, etc.
The court(during its yelling) made it clear that such(the case neglect and undue delay) was an intolerable situation as the Plaintiff was 87 and in deteriorating health and badly needed to get his case resolved. So, if an attorney seems to be causing undue delays, and is neglecting the case to a large extent, in a situation like that, and gets yelled at, I don't believe the attorney is prudent to pursue the judge for screaming at him/her.
Again, it's all situational.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died.
That is very sad news.
And oh hell, here we go…
According to this, not her last words, but shortly before her death, Justice Ginsburg dictated a statement including that "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new President is installed."
https://twitter.com/DaviSusan/status/1307100364198612993
My most fervent wish is that I be a billionaire. That ain't happening either.
Replace her after Trump is re-elected. Got it.
Is this a local lawyer blog? New paralegal in town. You have some ugly judicial campaign signs. Makes the neighborhoods look like shit
Couldn't have left your bad attitude back where you came from, eh?
I agree, spoken like a non judicial candidate.
Shoot, I've had a judge get mad at me for the way I was looking back at the judge however the last thing I would ever do is leave. In addition to admitting defeat, you've done a grave disservice to your client…