- Quickdraw McLaw
- 57 Comments
- 296 Views
Today at noon the Appellate Law Section is hosting a meet and greet with five Nevada Supreme Court candidates at UNLV. The five candidates expected to be in attendance are:
Justice Lidia Stiglich
Court of Appeals Judge Jerome Tao
District Court Judge Elissa Cadish
Alan Lefebvre, Esq.
John Rutledge, Esq.
Anyone going and want to let us know what they say? Anyone plan to ask them about trust account audits, Court of Appeals efiling, fiscal transparency, citable decisions, timely decisions, etc?
Meanwhile, Boyd ’18 grad Alex Velto has written an opinion piece for The Nevada Independent about how this fall’s election could affect the Court of Appeals–commending the Court on reducing the Supreme’s case load and speculating that the CoA could eventually change to a pass through court instead of the pass-down model.
I am supporting Tao.
I am supporting Tao
I was going to support Elissa Cadish, but I withdrew my endorsement. I support Tao or John Rutledge.
Would ask E. Cadish why she is going after Sheldon Aldelson's sponsors when she is all Harry Reid?
I've been very impressed by Justice Stiglich. She is bright and can quickly find the central issues and sort them correctly.
I would support anyone who applies the law and does not steer a case the way they want to go like Cadish does. She is a part of the mess down at the RJC.
Ah, it's "judges need to apply the law" guy. Haven't heard from you for a day or two. Blog is repetitive.
Judges are suppose to apply the law. Your post is illogical. What else is a judge suppose to do?
Well yeah, obviously judges are supposed to apply the law. But the law is frequently ambiguous. This is especially true in Nevada, given that our Legislature is part time (so laws are often hastily drafted) and our Supreme Court doesn't issue many opinions clarifying those laws. And then on top of all that, there's a bunch of stuff that's just inherently in the judge's discretion, with nothing but common sense to guide them.
"Judges need to apply the law" is a true statement, but it's reductionist and trite to act like that's the only basis for evaluating a judge's performance. And I feel like in the context of politics, people frequently conflate "results I don't like" with "not following the law", which I don't think is a healthy attitude to take.
Suspicion: Confirmed. Cadish basher is not only not an attorney, is not very bright.
Cadish does not apply the law.
I am a veteran who supports Jerome Tao.
11:23"s comment is funny. A judge has to apply the law. It is an abuse of discretion not to. What else do they do?
Good lord, Cadish is one of the best and most respected judges at the RJC. She's not perfect (and I can't defend Tim), but the person constantly ripping on her really needs to give it up. State specific grievances if you want, but the attacks have grown pathetic.
Same commenter. I think Tao would be fine as well. It's a shame when we have two decent candidates for the same judgeship when there are so many inferior judges.
9:51 is Cadish. She sucks.
I posted this once before, Tim Kelley is a bully. He screamed at my pregnant wife over nothing. He made her cry. One of many reasons I will not vote for Cadish
I did well in front of Elissa Cadish. I won when the law was not on our side. I was pro per. Thank you, Cadish.
10:40, that's a pretty good one. At least the Cadish bashing is getting creative.
8:50, please keep campaigning, Cadish. It has been at least four weeks since you been out. It is better when you are not in the office, destroying people's lives. You are so paranoid, you cannot read.
1040's comment was a compliment. You need to chill.
Pathetic, and boring.
Ditto what 9:35 said. I am mixed about Cadish. I generally find her well-prepared and knowledgeable about the issues. I do not like her facial expressions during oral argument (I can't pin-point it, but there is something off-putting). But, I would prefer Cadish to a Bare or Israel anyday.
I agree with this. She reminds me of arguing in front of Kozinski—she needs you to know how much smarter the is than anyone else in the room. For her, part of that is rolling her eyes or making snarky facial expressions. I can’t point to one ruling she made in any case that I think is wrong. But her demeanor is so offputting that I couldn’t bring myself to support her.
She is smarter than you. She thinks she is better than you. She is not. We do not need this on the Supreme.
I need judges who will get the law right most if not all of the time. Whether they are making faces is not important to me. I think Cadish and Tao generally makes the right decisions, so either of them will be my pick. Good luck to both of them.
Does anyone else think it would be nice to not have one RJC but to have a few smaller courthouses scattered throughout the valley, due to the size of Las Vegas and the ever increasing traffic on valley roads?
Ever since moving here I have wondered why there is only one main courthouse for all of Las Vegas (excluding Henderson, North Las Vegas, and the family courthouse).
That is the worst idea of the day.
It's a pain in the ass when I have to go from one hearing in the Eighth to another hearing 2 blocks away in federal court. Your idea would make that pain much much larger.
The other problem with this is, the one main courthouse is next to the one main jail, which makes it way easier to handle the logistics of transporting inmates to court hearings. If we had smaller satellite courthouses, we would also need smaller satellite jails, and more shifts for guards driving inmates back and forth to various hearings.
+1 @ 11:21, 11:28, and 11:41. Not to mention it's a pain in the ass not only to get over to federal court, but just to go to multiple hearings in the same courthouse. Idea fail.
I would like a separate court for civil cases and one for criminal cases. No offense to the criminal bar, but your clients stink – I mean literally – riding the elevator with the criminals and their families and friends often makes me want to gag. They so often reek of stale cigarette smoke, sweat, etc. And I am talking about 9 in the morning – I can't imagine what they smell like by 5 p.m.
Lots of people are lampooning this idea, but its actually pretty common in most cities. Salt Lake, for example, has a large courthouse downtown, but also another district court in West Jordan. The justice courts are spread throughout the city as well. That might be an idea – remove the justice court and municipal courts from the RJC and put them in smaller courthouses throughout the county. Free up more space in the RJC for the ever-growing district court.
I have a great idea, assuming anyone here practices family law, most lawyers quit eventually…let's get rid of the family court completely and give their cases to the real judges at the RJC.
Seconded. Family court is garbage.
There are real judges at RJC other than Denton.
No
To 12:02 and 12:15.You won't get any argument from me that there are some serious problems with that court. But, please forgive me, but it is sort of a lay person approach to say we should get rid of some specialized court simply because we are disenchanted with it.
What good does it do to eliminate the court? The cases would then be assigned to RJC judges who have no experience at these cases, and even less interest in being assigned such cases.
Many RJC judges have such a condescending attitude to Family cases, and would probably regularly refuse to hear them–demanding that the parties settle the cases in their entirety in the hallway at the time of the trial so the court won't have to hear it(which, admittedly, is not always a bad thing).
For older attorneys, this will remind you of the way it was handled until the creation of the Family Court in the early 90's.
A good half or more of the District Judges would absolutely refuse to hear a Divorce trial. So, if the trial were set for 1:30, they would make you remain in the corridors negotiating until it were resolved–all the way to 5:00 if need be.
So, flawed though some of the Family judges are, a lot of the judges are experienced in this area and do at least an adequate job. You want to give these case to judges who detest the area of law, have zero experience in it, and many of them will probably utterly refuse to hear such matters–forcing parties to sometimes cave to onerous terms just to have the matters finalized.
You want these cases assigned to the "real" judges at the RJC–half of whom are regularly barbecued in this blog as being clueless and condescending.If you guys eventually need a divorce, and your assets adequately protected, trust me–you will be much better off with an average Family Judge, even if they may be mediocre, than you would with an ivory tower RJC judge who, in addition to having zero experience in this area,of law, may have utter contempt for it.
Well, it doesn't help when the appellate judges essentially call Family Court judges "District Court Judge Lite"
Stiglich must go will vote for Harter
Would he be an improvement?
No Tao, no Harter, no Rutledge at the meet and greet
On the civil side, which judge is seen as more pro-plaintiff – Tao or Cadish?
Plaintiff Creditor– Cadish. Plaintiff personal injury-Tao
Cadish is definitely pro creditor, pro bank. If you are a debtor, recuse her.
Unless you represent a lender in an HOA foreclosure case and then Cadish will literally argue the other side's case for them (I've had her do that at trial and summary judgment) and then she will rule against the lender.
Cadish screwed over my client over in a homeowner foreclosure case. She was bending over backwards to help the bank attorneys.
I was in on a hearing where Cadish treated a young attorney like shit up against a bank. Attorney was holding their own against Cadish. She does not like it.
Cadish is an insecure, you file in the blank. She is nasty and personal to people who are smarter than her.
I have been in from of cadish many times and she can be grumpy at times but all judges can. Frankly, all of us would be nasty if we had to deal with dumb ass people all day. Look at the comments on this blog.
Truth hurts.
Cadish had the courage to grant relief to Fred Steese based on a prosecutorial misconduct claim and an actually innocent defendant.
Courageous. Read her writing sample. It is awesome.
Yeah, there aren't many judges who would sign off on an opinion that essentially rules that two of your fellow judges screwed up a case. It took integrity. And there are a lot of judges who don't care about doing the right thing for people like prisoners who not only don't have any influence, but aren't valued enough by society that anybody would raise a fuss if a judge rules against them. To protect the powerless by speaking truth to your peers is, sadly, a rare quality in a judge.
Link to the writing sample?
The one for her federal judge app
Locking this one down. Please at least be constructive with your criticisms of the judiciary. The personal insults are petty and accomplish nothing productive.