- Quickdraw McLaw
- 55 Comments
- 686 Views
- A man represented by Dennis Prince was awarded a $1.95 million judgment after eating a sandwich with a toothpick in it. [RJ]
- An NFL player says race played a role in his interaction with Metro on the night following the Mayweather fight. [RJ]
- There are some new one-way streets downtown. [Las Vegas Sun]
Who was defense counsel for the toothpick case?
Barron and Pruitt
Scrumptous.
The bailiffs going on the time clock might be interesting. https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/clark-county/clark-county-bailiffs-to-settle-lawsuit-over-unpaid-overtime/. I think they'll regret it. I'm surprised how much they are paid given the type of work they do compared to police officers. I wonder how much the County blew in attorneys' fees for its labor lawyer on this one. They usually spend much more fighting their labor cases than it would have cost to settle early on.
The Marshals have been asking for a time clock system for a couple years now. The judges refuse to allow it in the courthouse, because of their other appointed staff they don't want tracked. The supreme Court order a compensation study in 2015. It came back a C28. So the 27 we settled for still is not on par with what we should be paid. The article is screwed in the Marshal's favor at first glance for the wages. They show entry level officers. Marshals only have an entry level. All other agencies have a PO1 and PO2 level. We come in $10k+ yearly under most other agencies. Bailiff function or police function. Marshals are category 1 officers. We work have and hand with Metro COs. We save social people's lives. We conduct investigations, and PC arrest. (Unless you're an attorney. They are allowed to walk out the door when they commit felony gun crimes. When command allows us to submit an arrest warrant for said attorney, judge Sullivan and the DAs office dismiss the case, and seal the record. Same with at least 3 other attorneys, but every civilian had been prosecuted for the same charge.) Marshals are just looking for what all other agencies in the state have: collective bargaining, paid lunches, police fire PERS, 289 Rights, and adequate pay. The county controls all these issues by statue. Yet they have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars defending 2 cases. 1 is now settled. They continue to wait your tax dollars defending a supreme Court case.
"We settled for." Who is "we"?
The "we" isn't important. The issues are what's important!
No really, the "we" is really important because it goes to the fact that you are one of the Marshals with a pecuniary interest in the issue who was on this Blog at 10:12 a.m. instead of working while advocating for overtime. "We" is central to your argument, the axe you grind or lack thereof.
Well, luckily as government employees, we are suppose to get 2 breaks and lunch hour in a work day. Doesn't always happen, and that was one of our complaints. we also have vacation time and sick leave. Also other various types of leave. I assure you we put in more than our time we are paid for.
I had no idea bailiffs made that much. In what world should bailiffs be compensated anywhere near the same rate as metro officers?
In their fantasy world where they care only about the time that they put in and nothing about the fact that they do very little in that time. (And they are Marshals now, not bailiffs).
2 breaks? Practically your entire day is a break in comparison to Metro. If you know a judge, you hang out in their courtroom for 4 hours a day, and jerk off the rest. If you don't know a judge, you hang out at the metal detectors for 5 hours, and jerk off the rest. You are on call during lunch? Oh, woe is you.
1:24 PM
Shouldn't you be billing right now? (Sorry. That's a little snarky)
All that the Marshals have ever asked for was fairness. The Courts have run this agency in the most dysfunctional fashion since it's inception in 1973 and it has shown with SOME of the people that they've hired.
At times, there have been some poor choices made in the hiring of Marshals. Very few of the problems are left. One simple truth can be drawn from this: If you want professional, quality candidates, You have to have the pay and benefits to attract them. Many of us are retired from other agencies. Quite a few of us are mid-career and enjoying the fact that we don't work weekends and holidays anymore. And yes, some of the Marshals don't have a single day behind the wheel of a patrol car. No, this isn't a particularly exciting or stimulating "cop" job, but the Marshals are still law enforcement officers (listed by name in NRS 289.150).
I don't know which "they" 8:18 is referring to, but I feel that the County and Courts will regret the time-keeping system when they realize how much time Deputies work for free.
Be well, everyone.
4:08– I look forward to the day that Marshals have that time clock and show us not only how many hours they worked but what they did for those hours and how many sections of the newspaper they managed to get read.
In no way are we comparing ourselves to metro, or asking to be paid what they are paid.
Well, I worked for years with criminal investigators for the Attorney General's office (most of them retired police or P&P Officers desperate to get away from the crushing workload). Now I work with Marshals in the Clark County system and all I see is a lot of very hard-working people doing the best job they can. They deal with the same 'clientele' that Metro deals with, but usually with 15+ of them at one time when they are in Court. They also deal with Judges, who have no problems asking them to go above and beyond every day. At least the AG investigators were compensated as law enforcement, even though they rarely dealt with anything but white collar criminals. The AG investigators were allowed vehicles, and the State paid for those vehicles, even when they only were used to drive those same investigators to work and then back home. Law enforcement is law enforcement, they have to meet POST requirements just like all of the rest of them, so Marshals should be compensated better than they are. I think most of the Marshals are retired cops/military/other jurisdictions, so they don't seem to be all that concerned about how much they are compensated, as they have another paycheck coming in, but they deserve way more respect than they are given. Additionally, can you imagine dealing with the people at the entrance to the RJC? That should be considered hazardous duty in my opinion!!
The way this story(the man awarded almost two million for biting a sandwich with a toothpick in it) is reported, including inflammatory headlines, is a large reason people hate lawyers and clamor for tort reform.
With stories like this, the short sound bites and outrageous one sentence summaries, is what causes the problem. Most people don't actually read such articles, but they just see a dramatic headline screaming at them, or hear a couple sentences of a distorted summary on the radio, t.v., or internet.
Naturally, if all we are initially told is that he was awarded almost two million for biting a sandwich with a tooth pick in it, of course that sounds outrageous. But for the few people who actually read the entire article, the medical situation, including very serious surgeries, and the great affect upon quality of life,demonstrate how truly serious this man's situation is.
Same thing with the venerable favorite about the women who spills a little bit of coffee on herself and supposedly gets millions and millions from McDonald's. Apparently, McDonald's would brew the coffee until it's scalding hot in order to get the greatest number of cups out of the coffee beans(obviously, to maximize profits on their coffee).
The elderly women who purchased a cup, balanced it between her thighs while driving(not unforseen or particularly irresponsible back then as most cars did not yet have cup holders). The coffee splattered all over, causing serious burns to her crotch, private organs, inner thighs, etc. Multiple surgeries were required, and significant pain was suffered over long periods(pains from burns can be among the worst). If I recall, the jury decided that the proper deterrent or message was to award the women one day's worth of profit McDonalds earns from the sale of their coffee.
I'm not a Plaintiff's lawyer, and I do recognize that many of them are not so honorable and can distort things and be motivated by greed(just like some attorneys from any field of practice).But I think a lot of the false narrative offered in support of tort reform consisted of these largely false anecdotes and grossly distorted horror stories of runaway verdicts on frivolous matters, everyone's insurance rates then skyrocketing, and we all then go to hell in a hand basket, etc.
This is awful, and the defendant should have to pay. But the moral of the story is to chew your food a bit while cramming your pie hole with your favorite bacon-wrapped delicacy. How the hell do you swallow half a toothpick without noticing it's in your mouth?
Regarding the McDonald's coffee case, her award was reduced due to a finding of comparable fault. She did not end up with "cool" millions as many believe. I believe that it was less than a million. I am certain in the toothpick case that it will be appealed and eventually settle for something less than what was awarded.
8:31…don't you realize that the EP public relations people made sure to get this story to the RJ with "sound bites" included? They've been doing this for years. What's so funny about it is the RJ reporter still got Dennis' name wrong in the original article.
Here are some more stories which may be of interest:
Volkswagen Engineer Gets Prison in Diesel Cheating Case: (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/business/volkswagen-engineer-prison-diesel-cheating.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fautomobiles)
Elected Florida prosecutor discontinues her policy against pursuing the death penalty:
(http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/elected_florida_prosecutor_discontinues_her_policy_against_pursuing_the_dea?platform=hootsuite)
U.S. House unanimously approves sweeping self-driving car measure:
(https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-selfdriving/u-s-house-unanimously-approves-sweeping-self-driving-car-measure-idUSKCN1BH2B2)
Moratorium lifted on recreational pot in Henderson:
(https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/sep/05/moratorium-lifted-on-recreational-pot-in-henderson/)
And yet… the ultimate cause of his injuries, dire though they were, was that he ate a sandwich with a toothpick in it. Whether or not you think he should have noticed the toothpick, and whether you think he maybe shouldn't have inhaled his sandwich such that an inch-long toothpick went unnoticed, will guide your perception of his case.
People don't care that the old lady had crotch burns. They do care that McD's served coffee at insanely hot temperatures, that they'd been warned it was too hot, that it was significantly hotter than comparable companies, and they served it that hot anyway. That's what makes them understand the liability.
The people who clamor for tort reform are often the very people who tort law protects from the rich and powerful. Our nation is full of uneducated white people who continue to vote against their economic interests in favor of the 1%. They believe the real villains are DACA kids, gays and Muslims. They are too stupid to realize who is really screwing them. It's insanity.
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p20-578.pdf
8:45 here. I'm not saying that all white people are uneducated. In fact, not all people, white or otherwise, who have a college degree are actually educated critical thinkers, and vice versa. Similarly, there are people who have no formal education, but through their own effort and innate talent, are educated.
What I am saying is that there is a subset of whites in this country who are uneducated and regularly vote against their interests, usually because they are distracted by their spiteful prejudices. Unfortunately, right now we are all at their mercy. They live in a world full of boogie men and alternate facts, and yet they hold the levers of power that affect the well-being and security for all of us. Scary times.
Blah, blah, blah. You think poor whites are voting "against their economic interests" because you arrogantly think it is in their interest to take money from the government that has been taken from others. Maybe they would rather live on what they earn rather than leech off of other people. Maybe giving the government more power in return for 5-10% more cash per month is against their principles and something properly to be avoided. And maybe they realize that in the long run government aid traps people into a modern form of slavery. Hmmm, can we think of any examples of that?
"Blah, blah, blah. You think poor whites are voting "against their economic interests" because you arrogantly think it is in their interest to take money from the government that has been taken from others."
Wrong. Uneducated, poor white people vote against their interests because they support a Republican Party that actively redistributes wealth from working and middle class Americans to 1%ers. Look at the welfare handouts our GOP elected officials gave to the 1% ownership of Tesla, the Raiders and Faraday.
11:21 You are delusional. The Republican Party in no way actively redistributes wealth from the working class to the 1%. That statement is straight Democratic Party talking point BS.
Income tax rates are graduated moron. Take an economics class and get back to me. Most people in the "working class" only pay 10% or 15% federal income tax and that money is not funneled to the 1%. Rather the bulk of that money goes to national defense and social programs like medicare and social security. How the hell is that funding the 1%?
Gag on a toothpick, 12:35
Love the tough toothpick. Brings me luck and happiness during my discovery comish appearances.
Reading about the toothpee reminds me of the bar exam.
The point I was trying to make about the coffee case is that all those factors you just mentioned(in your concise and correct summation of the legal dynamic and psychological motivation involved) is that most people who were exposed to reporting of the story were offered none of what you mention. The only info. they generally had, courtesy of the media, is what an abuse of the system it is, and how horrible greedy lawyers are, that this women got millions for spilling a little coffee on herself. But, as you and I point out, the true facts and dynamics were dramatically different.
And back to the tooth pick case, you raise one of the very reasonable issues which will be largely ignored by the media. They will gloss over whether or not he should have noticed the toothpick, how careless the establishment was, to what extent both may share negligence, etc. The whole nature of most of the reporting will be simply that it is so outrageous that he bites a sandwich with a toothpick and receives a cool two million. But the devil is in the details, and the media does not want to distract low-information readers and listeners with too much discussion of the man's medical situation. The message is simply that it is outrageous that he received two million for something, that on the surface, sounds frivolous.
For clarification, the comment at 8:52 is largely in response to 8:40, who happens to be a very bright,perceptive person, as is 8:45.
the McD's case, as with toothpick case, are both about strict liability. If you make consumable goods that are unsafe, you are liable. period. In the McD's case, they found old granny 20% comparative for putting the hot coffee in between her legs (no cup holders in that ford probe she was in)…I dont think there was any comparative for toothpick case. that said, when you go in as a defense lawyer admitting liability and only arguing damages, you are rolling the dice on what the jury will award. As a plaintiffs' atty, It is only a matter of how much money I am getting at that point, and whether I can beat Deft OOJ. In my experience, most of these types of cases blow up in Deft's face.
Point of fact – the toothpick is not consumable. The broken piece was an inch long (pretty obvious when inserted into a 1/2 inch diameter bay scallop) and is meant to be removed before you hoover your bacon-wrapped shellfish. Should my favorite kabob place be on the hook if I swallow the skewer?
To:10:01: I don't practice in any area of Civil Law, but I thought that in Nevada comparative negligence could not be utilized to reduce an award in a case involving strict liability.
However, I believe misuse of product can be asserted.
The reason I am inquiring about this(whether comparative negligence can be asserted in a Nevada case involving strict liability)is that you opined on whether there was any comparative negligence for the tooth pick guy.
I am experiencing a little difficulty comprehending the factual situation with the toothpick guy. Even had this been a standard sandwich(which it was not), and let's say there was a toothpick hidden between two pieces of bread, meat, cheese and dressing, how do you bite into, chew and swallow an entire inch of tooth pick before you realize something is wrong?
But compounding things is that this is not a standard sandwich. It is a bacon wrapped scallop, which of course, consists of a large tooth pick with a bacon wrapped scallop in the middle. One is expected to grip the toothpick between their fingers, and then chew the scallop and bacon off of the tooth pick and then dispose of the tooth pick.
So, did he consume the scallop and bacon, and then noticing there is no further food remaining, and being completely famished, he decided to consume the toothpick? Obviously not, so what actually happened?
I practice personal injury law and this case is not that extraordinary. There was a famous food poisoning case in Reno/Washoe County years ago which was one of the largest food poisoning cases of its kind involving the Reno Hilton Buffet and "projectile vomiting and diarrhea." They established in that case that employees could not get off sick time from work and so they came to work in the kitchen sick as a dog. The verdict was in the millions for essentially an inconvenience sickness.
The tooth pick case involves a sympathetic plaintiff with a lot of damages. You have a villainous defendant. Liability arguments don't work as a defense in these scenarios. I taught college and had my students take on the McDonald's hot coffee case. One group of students were the plaintiff and the other were the defendant. The remaining class members were the jury. The case information and arguments were gleaned from public sources like the Wall Street Journal. It turns out that little old lady plaintiff offered to settle her case for $50,000.00 which McDonald's refused. McDonald's had many other hot coffee cases that they settled and litigated as it turns out. My class found for the plaintiff after hearing all the evidence. They did not hear about the settlement offer till later or the other hot coffee cases till they reached their findings for the plaintiff. McDonald's has since lowered the temperature on their coffee and coffee is a big part of their business rivaling Starbuck's.
Every time I eat at a local buffet I endure projectile vomiting and diarrhea. I never realized I can turn this to something quite profitable.
As you suggest, in the tooth pick case, and the McDonald's coffee case, the devil is in the details. In the tooth pick case, if there is a likeable plaintiff with significant damages, and an odious defendant, the jury will focus on those matters, rather than the details of the law and/or their jury instructions.
And in the coffee case, once we peel it away a little, we realize it's not the absurdity that it was portrayed as being in media outlets.
The NSC loves long vacations. Still no opinions.
No published opinions. One Order dismissing an appeal. 5 weeks without a published opinion. How would you like to take 10% of the year off from doing anything?
There are some pending opinions that will make for interesting case law. They had better be worth the wait.
Justice delayed is justice denied. Justice(s) taking a 5 week vacation is justice denied.
The REAL injustice is, after clicking through 5 recaptachas and pulling out what is left of my hair, it turns out that the appeal has been dismissed. At least with the Court of Appeals you can see the disposition before clicking on the decision.
Correct 10:44.
Maybe one of the ADA trolls can bring a claim for this injustice.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/las-vegas-lawyer-pleads-guilty-to-stealing-millions-from-clients/
Rob Graham Pleads Guilty, Will Face 16-40 Year Sentence.
CrimLaw folks, how much time is he likely to actually serve?
It's enough money I'd say he's looking at 8 – 20.
I don't think he serves even 8. Very smart to plead guilty to state charges. Fed time would be easier but much longer.
3:11, yeah but the state only charged him for crimes against a small minority of his victims. Couldn't the feds still nail him on some of the other victims?
But they won't. They will determine that his pound of flesh has been taken. Graham will end up serving less time that Keith Gregory, who just was the attorney for the guy who stole the money. This is why the Federal system is just a joke.
looks like he stipulated to 16-40 year sentence (the RJ has a copy of the GPA). So he will be up for parole in 16 years.
One sentence runs consecutive, and the rest run concurrent with the consecutive sentence. And that's how 8-20 years gets doubled up.
So on a base sentence of 16 years, parole eligibility would be when?
16 years because they are category B felonies. No good time credit off the front end.
Ouch. I mean maybe appropriate but ouch. So his first date for parole eligibility is 2033?