- Quickdraw McLaw
- 26 Comments
- 137 Views
- Cliven Bundy no longer wants his current attorney, Bret Whipple, or his standby attorney Angela Dows, to represent him (a month before trial). [RJ]
- Here are details on the dismissal of charges against Alexis Plunkett. [RJ]
- Life is beautiful. It’s not just a festival taking place downtown this weekend. Get out and enjoy the nice fall weather this weekend.
So I heard Boyd is getting graduates hired by big Cravath-scale-paying New York and LA firms now. When did that happen? Just a few years ago (albeit during the recession) Boyd grads couldn't land a job at even the local firms.
It has always been about WHO you know as much as WHAT you know…pretty sure whoever that Boyd grad was, he/she knew or was able to get connected to people who knew people.
There are a few judicial children coming through Boyd these days
They will soon realize, that in our city, the sweet fruit of nepotism, and the benefit of built-in viable connections, will go much further, in securing their initial position, than hard work and merit.
Sad, but true, I'm afraid.
I think it is Ryan Bundy who doesn't want his standby counsel (worst job in the world).
Cliven wants to fire Bret Whipple as his counsel (not backup). Angela Dows is backup counsel for Ryan Bundy. Standby Counsel is not the worst job in the world because you don't have to take any responsibility for the bad decisions which your client makes.
*Sorry I said backup and meant standby.
Just throwing this out there: under NRPC 7.2a, you have to get your advertising pre-approved, with certain narrow exceptions. Anyone believe the guys advertising on Craigslist got their ads approved?
Websites = exempt. https://www.nvbar.org/wp-content/uploads/Advertising%20Committee%20Rules%20of%20Procedure_12.10.14.pdf
Is a blog a website?
Craigslist IS a website.
Wait, so your interpretation of that exemption is that any advertisement that appears on a website (not IS a website, but that appears on one) is totally exempt? That's a hole big enough to drive a fleet of trucks through. My interpretation is that attorney websites are exempt, but there's no meaningful distinction between taking out a large ad in the RJ versus paying them to have an ad placed on the RJ's website. So while Richardharris.com might be exempt, any facebook popup ads require approval.
Just more lawyer written ambiguity!
D. Advertisements exempt from filing include:
1. Announcements limited to change of address, affiliation, or staffing;
2. Derivative advertisements;
3. Listings in a regularly published law list, newsletter, or similar publication directed primarily to other lawyers and legal professionals;
4. Tombstone advertisements; and
5. Websites
Blawg goes and gets all civil and now we're debating the NRPC's.
*Sigh*
@4:04: WE CAN ADVERTISE ON TOMBSTONES?! Learn something new every day!
Dibs on the Veterans Cemetery in Boulder City and Downtown.
I'm still totally unsatisfied with the explanation of the dismissal. I don't really care, just fascinated because Vilani ruled against me once on a really plain issue of law.
What happened with the person–a guy who was handling the Academic Success program. He is gone and they hired a writing professor. Does anyone know about this at Boyd???
Minus 3 points for misuse of the reply function.
ADA sucks. Chapter 212 refers to "prisoners" in "jail" about 10 times, so the argument that the person she allegedly gave the cell phone to wasn't a "prisoner" under the statute because he was in jail, not prison, is garbage. Also, you can aid and abet someone even if you are legally incapable of committing the crime yourself. NSC like every other SC has been clear that all you have to do for accessory liability in Nevada is aid and abet the commission of a crime by someone else. You cannot be convicted for aiding and abetting a crime that only the aider and abettor himself, but not the principal, can legally commit, see 95 Nev. 61, but it doesn't work the other way around. That is because the point of aiding and abetting liability is to prevent/punish people who help others commit offenses. So long as the thing you aided and abetted was an offense, you are subject to accessory liability.
Sorry, just reread the article. ADA was right. Villani sucks.
The ADA was not right. He didn't even make the right arguments, such as… Aiding and abetting doesn't require it's own punishment. Villani ruling that the statue doesn't provide for punishment of someone who is not a prisoner is ridiculous. They can be punished as the principal committing the crime is punished. It's not that hard and the ADA didn't even argue it. At least not according to the article. I wasn't there, so maybe he did and was ignored.
Villani lost my vote.
I'm sure he's devastated.
And he gained my vote…
Any Boyd reunion gossip?