- Quickdraw McLaw
- 45 Comments
- 152 Views
- Judge Jim Crockett ordered the Clark County Coroner to pay $32,000. [RJ]
- The Army is challenging the Vegas Golden Knights trademark application. [ESPN]
- They’re getting closer to finalizing agreements regarding the Stadium. [RJ]
- Today is the last day to file for judicial candidates!
Can we talk about how insurance companies/defense attorneys abuse the mandatory arbitration program by always, always, filing a request for trial de novo? Of course, this happens after doing absolutely nothing through the course of arbitration (non-verified ROGGs,etc.)
Is anyone aware of any other Evidentiary hearings taking place concerning this matter?
Do they do so even when the arbitration decision is clearly favorable to them?
10:20, instead, can we talk about how personal injury plaintiffs and their sleazy, ambulance chasing attorneys abuse the mandatory arbitration program by always, always, filing a request for trial de novo? Of course, this happens after doing absolutely nothing through the course of arbitration (non-verified ROGGs,etc.)
Hey, 10:20 and 11:01–Stop! You're both right!
Seriously, you're both right–which helps explain the large percentage of trial de novos filed from both sides of the aisle.
And, myself having some experience over the years with both the Plaintiff's and Defense side, I can say you are both right about the unflattering characterization of both sides.
Plaintiff's attorneys may have a somewhat higher slime quotient
than defense counsel, but defense counsel suffer more from life-affecting deep cynicism caused by years in their trade–they assume anyone making a claim is a greedy, malingering gold bricker.
Now, often they are right about that, but not as universally as they insist they are.
Sounds to me that now that we have 20+ years experience with the program that we can call the program, as it currently exists, a ringing failure. Perhaps it should be modified from a mandatory arbitration program to a mandatory mediation program (akin to MSC's). The parties still get the benefit of an experienced outsider looking at the case and giving their opinion with the added benefit being an emphasis on resolution instead of conflict.
11:12 here again. 11:28 is absolutely right. System needs to be scuttled. Should be converted to mandatory mediation instead, which is how it conceptually started out on the early days.
10:20 here. It’s so hard for me to sit back here in this blog, looking at 11:01 out here, hollering my name!—When last year I spent more money, on spilled liquor, in bars from one side of this world to the other, than you made! You’re talking to the Rolex wearing, diamond ring wearing, kiss stealing, whoa! wheelin dealin’, limosuine riding, jet flying son of a gun and I’m having a hard time holding these alligators down!
But, to be serious, I think 11:28's suggestion of a mandatory mediation program is an excellent suggestion. This mandatory arbitration program is a failure.
10:37 – yes. I have seen them Request TDN even on awards less than meds.
OK, but the process has to have some teeth in it or otherwise be as useless as an MSC in a med mal case. Such as: If the case doesn't settle, the mediator makes a recommendation. Parties have 10 days to accept or reject, and it's blind so that neither side knows if the other has agreed or not. If both parties agree then the case is done. If neither party agrees then they go forward. If one party agrees and the other doesn't, then the non-agreeing party pays all fees and costs if they don't beat the recommended number by 20%. Do it early in the case.
LVMPD cop gets prison time for excessive force. Has that ever happened here before? This is the case that the DA’s office originally filed as a misdemeanor battery case and it looked like he was only going to get a slap on the wrist, so the USAO charged him.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/ex-las-vegas-police-officer-sentenced-for-excessive-force/
That's a rather harsh punishment. Seems like a win for the Feds. Who was his attorney?
FPD
The CO who shot inmate Andrew Arevalo and shot and killed inmate Carlos Perez is also facing felony charges, case still pending.
Mary Kay Holthus is challenging Mark Bailus?
Thank you Tom@LetiziaAgency.com for another season of district judges and potential judges with their hands out.
Mary Kay Holthus? Who is she and what does she do? Does she have any reputation to speak of in the area(s) of law she practices?
I never heard of this person. Does that make me really out of the loop?
Holthus is an experienced criminal prosecutor who has capably handled some pretty high-profile matters. She would be a good choice for judge, imo.
Bailus has proven himself to be an excellent Judge. He has my vote.
@12:09 sure, but what reason is there to replace bailus with her? just because she might make a good judge doesn’t mean she should be able to replace an incumbent who is otherwise fine.
12:09, bailus is also an experienced criminal litigator who had previously handled some high profile stuff. why replace him with holthus?
Bailus has really underwhelmed from what I expected of him. Been a true disappointment on the bench.
With that said, I fully anticipated Dave Thomas being public enemy #1 by this time but it is clear that Letizia is a far worse, despicable culprit so far.
Bailus is already one of the best judges we have–even in this short a time. He has my vote.
Jerry Tao?? Please no
I'm not a Vegas native. Can someone please explain the source of Silver's political/fundraising clout? Why is she so unbeatable?
She's a social and political ladder climber. That usually translates into an ability to fundraise and to garner political endorsements.
Her father, Frank Silver, is a doctor in town going back to probably the 60's. Lots of connections everywhere. I'm not sure if he's still around or not.
Another thing in Silver's favor: She was a prosecutor for many years, which means she has the support of the law and order community, while at the same she's generally been fair to both sides in criminal cases – so the criminal defense bar doesn't hate her either. She gets my vote.
Cadish draws two more challengers: Jerome Tao, court of appeals judge, and Alan Lefebvre, former state bar president known for, uh, some things during his tenure.
Filing closes at 5 p.m. today. Will anyone play musical judicial seats right before filing closes?
http://nvsos.gov/sos/elections/2018-election/2018-filed-candidates-judicial-1656
Wow, talk about a basket of deplorables.
I always liked you Alan. But then your tenure as President of the State Bar represented a horrible year in the history of this State Bar. You then came on this very Blog and presented a reprehensible case in defense of Kim Farmer. Not only will I not support you Alan but I will do everything in my power to make sure that your candidacy is a waste of personal resources.
2:47 I did a search looking for that defense of Ms. Farmer, but could not find it. Would be interested in seeing how she could be defended. Do you have a link?
Wow.I am glad there are choices.
It was earlier in 2017 in a discussion of the State Bar. Mr. Lefebvre submitted a signed post. I attempted to run a search in the righthand tab and nothing came up.
Ahhhh never trust the "Search" button to do what Google can do. https://lasvegaslawblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/guilty-graham.html
Now John Rutledge also in for NVSCT seat C
Me see plenty of opponents for Cadish. Understandable. She will lose.
And, just like that, Abbi Silver gets an unopposed SC seat. Welcome to the bench, Abbi. May God have mercy on the rest of us.
At least she will apply the law. You don't, you lose my vote.
Get real. You know how often the NSC incumbents run unopposed? Why the hell will she care if she loses your vote, when she'll likely never have another opponent?
How do you know 1:21 was only talking about Silver? You need to chill the hello out.
And yet my point applies to the entire Court. Do they care if they've lost your vote if they'll never draw an opponent? Hardesty has been on the bench since 2004. Didn't have an opponent in 2010 or 2016. Cherry is retiring after 12 years on the bench, never having pulled an opponent, even in his initial term. Parraguire was elected in 2004 with ~53% of the vote. Never faced an opponent since. Gibbons had no opponent when he was elected in 2002, and only faced off against one opponent (in 2008). Unopposed in 2014. Pickering? Unopposed her last campaign. Douglas? Unopposed his last cycle.
We have a Court by default.
If we had a Court which worked, which was a model of efficiency and fairness, I could understand it. We have a dysfunctional court (for reasons which have been well documented on this Blog).
In Justice Court, no one seems to have a problem with Zimmerman, Sciscento, Dustin-Cruz or Tobiasson. Some of them are not universally beloved, but I guess attorneys perceive they would all be real difficult to beat, so they remain unopposed.In the open seat, J D Leavitt should probably survive, but I think it will be very close against a female opponent who has some significant juice of her own. If Leavitt was hoping that he attracts only token opposition, well he did not get his wish. Ultimately, he wins by only 4, or perhaps 6, percentage points.
In District Court, the two Jones candidates remain unopposed, while Bailus deals with Holthus–a race Bailus should win, but it may only be a single digit spread, and not double digits. I guess the court-clerk abusing, document-throwing, screaming District Judge won't be on the ballot till 2020. Has he calmed down?
In Supreme Court,Stiglich probably beats Harter by a comfortable spread, but Harter probably still winds up with a respectable percentage that will be nothing to be ashamed about(considering that he will be badly out-raised and out-spent). Her tally will probably be about 14% or 16% greater than his, which means Harter should hold his head high. If you can't win, it's always good to make a strong showing, and he will.
Silver is still uncontested, while Caddish has a lot of company, including a couple sitting judges. Probably, Caddish and Tao will emerge from the Primary, and in the General she will win by a reasonably close 53% to 47%.
Am I okay with any of these predictions, or is my crystal ball totally clouded over today?
If I could have "liked" your comment, I would. Good input.
2:38 here again. Hey, 2;36, who gives a tinker's damn?
Free country but could you please reflect on matters and decide if you really feel there is any compelling need to post such statements?
Or, if you still insist on posting such matters, could you please explain how the question of who someone falls in love with has any bearing on their jurisprudence skills. So far, she seems like an outstanding jurist.
I consider myself a fairly conservative guy(at least on some matters),yet I'm concerned about the apparent insensitivity, and lack of appropriateness,of your posting. I can't imagine what more liberal-leaning people must think.
Again, could you please at least reflect on this matter and ask yourself whether these very public statements, about very private matters,in any meaningful way is worthy of discussion.
An excellent jurist, and when on the District Court was just about the highest rated(if not the highest rated) District Judge in the state.I don't believe anyone has ever suggested her rulings demonstrate bias for or against any groups of people. So, therefore, if what you say is true it still does not matter one iota.
Who are you responding to? Me no see a 2:36 on today's date.
Someone keeps deleting comments. Censorship!
They were irrelevant baiting comments. The Blog will survive without the comment that used to be at 2:36.