- Quickdraw McLaw
- 33 Comments
- 170 Views
- Here’s the latest on briefing of the dispute between Circus Circus and AIG over Covid-related insurance coverage. [Law 360]
- Senator Chuck Schumer will propose federal decriminalization of marijuana. [Las Vegas Sun]
- Lack of evidence secures a reprieve for a Tahoe bear and her cub. [Nevada Current]
I see the bear is solo. Very lucky wasn't in front of NSB. They would've "dispatched" her.
State Bar equals Nevada Supreme Court are soulless.
This might be the death knell for the Circus Circus Property and my prediction is that we will see another LV implosion in the future. Long overdue IMHO.
Schumer is a traitorous criminal but if he does this one thing….
Amen, sista.
You a pot-head, Focker?
Schumer has done and said as much as Trump ever did, to divide the country.
Bad juju
To 10:11: Why? What about alcohol. You just like drunks but not potheads?
Pot should be 100% legal. It's a joke that alcohol is legal federally but pot is not.
Agree with 12:04. 11:44 is delusional. Who do you see walking around with Schumer inspired attire? Who do you know has been to a big Schumer ego rally? Did Schumer call for an attack on congress? Did Schumer preside over the first non-peaceful transfer of power in this country?
1211 is delusional. Schumer couldn't get 25 people to a rally let alone 25,000. But, don't trip fellas, Schumer will get his. Its coming…….
No one can stop it.
Ok Q
Dear 12:11: I imagine you have drank from a cup of Scrabble letters, let them digest for a bit, then had violent diarrhea in order to write your insults to half of this country. I'm not talking bad Taco Bell sh*ts, I'm talking been-eating-and-drinking-all-night-at-a-buffet sh*ts. Then you aimed your a** at the keyboard and in the words of the immortal Leslie Nielson "let er' rip." #MAGAforever
MAGA is in the death throws and heading for the dustbin of history. Thanks MAGA scum for taking us down with you. #TRUMP IS A TRAITOR
I am an avowed #NeverTrumper. I've been told, many times over the last six years, that MAGA was in its "death throes." I assure you that it is not. I have learned that the people in my orbit are not representative of the nation as a whole. The MAGA people are much more numerous than you think, 3:30 PM. They are committed and aren't going anywhere. They will likely propel Ron DeSantis to victory in 2024, especially if the Democrats are foolish enough to nominate Kamala Harris, who is very, very, very out of touch with fly over country and places like the upper midwest.
To 3:37 PM – 3:30 Here – Agree Harris cannot be nominated for President and doing so would be disaster. In fact, I fault Biden for this choice, and believe that he won in spite of Harris. In other words he could have won with a more traditional candidate (and this is not code for Old White Guy). Agree that there are a lot, in fact, too many, MAGAts. However, there are also a lot of people that despise the "conservative republican" – MAGA mindset. I am an OWG educated in fly-over country and raised by staunch republicans. Even my parents are now recognizing that Trump is a, lets say, loser POS. By the same token they are not fans of "Kommie" Harris.
In the immortal words of Rodney King, "Cant we all just get along?"
The people I know who smoke pot every week or more all seem to have memory problems. I have no citation on point to substantiate that asseveration empirically. However, that is the definite and firm impression I am left with.
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Tell-Your-Children/Alex-Berenson/9781982103675
@330 Whatever you tell yourself to help you sleep at night. I am here to tell you that the traditional establishment GOP is dead and its pseudo-replacement is the America First MAGA party with Trump running the show. Nothing you can do to stop it.
@ 8:40 p.m., there are plenty of high functioning cannabis consumers who do not any memory problems. My guess is the people you know who use pot and have memory problems had those memory problems prior to using cannabis and continue to have issues.
Oh, look, Babs Buckley is the landlord tenant expert You could not even handle DETR. Shut up, already.
DETR remains a disaster. Buckley told me she had done something on a case but it turned out she did nothing.
Now she is in charge of landlord/tenant issues? Good luck!!!
11:07, you presumably know by now that people who lead departments or projects, due to their political connections and administrative skills, need not be the people who are experts at doing all the grunt work on the individual cases on a day-by-day basis.
Are you talking about the great Aaron? The guy who refused to bill or to show up for work? No grunt work for him!!!
Yes, the leader is not responsible for his or her department, got it.
2:18–point is not that the leader is not responsible for their department.
The point is that it can be naïve to point out that a leader of an organization or agency is not an expert as to the actual details of handling cases or projects on a day by day basis.
Usually, they are years removed from performing on that level, if they ever even did.
The leader is there, not to perform much of the actual grunt work, but instead to adopt and initiate policies. And often, they are not even the one to formulate such policy, but merely affix their name to it, and claim the credit for it, as the policy details are usually formulated by their high-ranking advisers.
That is how most successful large businesses, agencies, and governmental offices operate. The leader does none of the real grunt work, and often does not even really deal with the details of formulating policy and programs, and changes. But once their advisers formulate such policies, the leader then approves the policies, and are the ones who present the PR face to the media and public when presenting such policies and initiatives.
The leader is in charge, not necessarily due to their experience and expertise in that given area, but is there due to political connections, administrative abilities, ability to present and persuade(such as when lobbying before legislators, etc.).
Well, 4:19, that model you discuss, albeit quite cynical and over-simplified, does apply to many large business and agencies, but not necessarily to the majority of them.
But your post does remind me of something sort of related, or if not really related it at least triggered this memory for me:
My first few years of practice, as a junior associate, I wrote a fair number of briefs I was quite proud of, and put a great deal of time into the research and drafting of them. But the standard at the firm was that the junior associates could not sign, or even co-sign the briefs, but the only signature would be of the senior or junior partner, or the senior associate, who the junior associate was working under on the particular case in question.
It got to a point where my superiors trusted that my work was solid and reliable, and where it appeared they did not even bother to read, or proof read, my briefs, but merely signed them.
And when these briefs resulted in successful rulings, the senior associate, or junior or senior partner, in question, would soak up all the praise from others in the firm, and colleagues and others in the legal community, who happened to provide complimentary remarks as to the presentation and results of such matter.
And such supervising attorneys were not in the habit of saying that a lot of the credit is owed to the junior associate who did much(or all) of the research and drafting, etc.
Many attorneys who dealt, or are still dealing, with this dynamic know of which I speak.
I realize it's part of paying one's dues, but at some firms, if they won't let the young associate sign the brief solely, they will let the young associate co-sign along with the signature of the attorney higher on the totem pole, with the name of both attorneys printed out.
All of us who started out by working at larger, prestigious firms, experienced some level or some form of what you describe–the perception ofbeing under-paid, over-worked and underappreciated, in proportion to the quantity and quality of our work.
But I was never really overly sympathetic to my young colleagues who bitched endlessly about such situation. They ignored that such dynamic was a veritable guarantee when going to work for a large prestigious firm for their first few years as a licensed attorney.
They ignored that they were not yet great attorneys when they joined the firm, but were simply law school graduates who needed to learn on the job, which this provided them an opportunity for.
And they ignored that the lacked the critical requirement one needs before thy strike out on their own and hang their shingle–which is a solid client base, which the young associate lacks but which the firm they work for probably has in abundance.
But that all said, I always took a dim view of the practice of certain such firms to not even let the young associate co-sign their briefs, but instead the only signature header would be of the supervising attorney, who, as you suggest, may have invested no more sweat equity beyond signing their name to the brief.
4:38 and 5:02.
It never bothered me that much that as a young associate that I didn't get to sign my briefs.
But there was an exception. I wrote two successful appellate briefs my first couple years, and did not get to sign them.
And one resulted in a written opinion which is still cited, not infrequently, in personal injury litigation.
I'll admit that it would have been kind of nice, when this case is still cited and discussed over 30 years later, to see my name listed on page one of that opinion, as being attorney for appellant.
So, I have to instead stroke my ego through other methods–such as, I bet I know more Beatles songs than you do(the material as a group, not so much their solo ventures).
5:15, how do we do a challenge on Beatles' songs? Are you talking about a "name that tune" type challenge with the first four notes being played, or a lyrics challenge, or some other contest? Some of us know the Beatles' songs pretty well! (And I do not consider solo ventures to be Beatles' songs. To hell with Ringo's and Wings' songs!)
I'd just like to point out that the first Beatles album was released 58 years ago. So perhaps the two of you can have a Geritrol-chugging contest, too?
I kid, I kid.
Yeah, it was 58 years ago.
In the UK their first album, Please Please Me, was released in April 1963.
In the US, Beatlemania did not hit till January 1964, at which time two competing albums were released by two separate record companies–Introducing The Beatles by V.J. Records, and Meet the Beatles by Capitol Records.
So, pass the Geritol.
And, 6:16, Ringo had a few decent hit singles in 1973-1974, but other than that, yes, his other material is completely disposable.
As for Wings, some decent hit singles, but the albums were inconsistent and not up to muster
Band on the Run and Ram are jems.