I think that they really jumped the gun by conducting these hearings concerning these two judges.
It's apparent(if not obvious) that they cannot meet the highly rigorous standard to justify an immediate indefinite suspension, so to save face they are keeping it open for further "investigation."
Ordinarily, any all "investigation" is completed(and then double and triple checked and verified) before proceedings are initiated. And this should be even more true in cases where such dramatic relief(immediate suspension) is sought.
But, in this case not only did they initiate the proceedings prior to having these supposed "investigations" completed, but they actually conducted the two days of hearings.
So, once they realize that they cannot establish that the profanity, or the interference with administrative/clerical assignments, constitute any meaningful violations, rather than clearing the two judges, they keep it open so they can further "investigate."
"Investigate" what? I'm sure every clerk who wants to weigh in against these judges has already been interviewed and cooperated with the process.
I guess due process, and other protections, in some of these administrative matters(even when one's career and reputation is at stake) will never remotely approximate the due process that attaches to criminal proceedings. Can you imagine a criminal case wherein the jury is advised that they can choose between guilty, not guilty, or leaving the matter open indefinitely to see if the state's evidence dramatically improves based on possible subsequent "investigation"?
BTW, I think that the one judge may have created a real precarious professional and political situation for herself with that whole crusade and accusations against METRO and the D.A.'s Office. But that matter was only tangentially at issue in these proceedings.
These proceedings were chiefly centered on the use of profanity and mistreatment of clerical staff, and improper interference with clerical/administrative matters and assignments. And nothing of that sort was remotely established to the level of serious ethical violations, yet the dark cloud will continue to hang.
And before we indicate we don't care because they are judges, and perhaps judges disliked by sections of the Bar, we should realize this same approach may possibly become more common in Bar proceedings against attorneys, if the State Bar sees a certain trend in proceedings against judges.If judges now lack certain basic protections, you can bet attorneys will be at far greater risk when their professional actions attract disciplinary proceedings.
12:53 WOW – wordy
Not even today's topic.
You may not know that the process has two different exit points at which the Commission could have issued a private reprimand or caution letter. The Commission members are not stupid people and they must have thought there was enough to go forward with the last step in the process – a public hearing.
Who the fuck is in charge at the commission? This pisses me off.
Guest
Anonymous
January 3, 2020 12:13 am
2:43. Yes, I am the author of the wordy, and apparently moronic, post. True, the Commission is not composed of stupid people, and yes, the options you mentioned are available. But I think it is arguably a valid point that it may have been filed prematurely if after the hearings there is still a need for investigation.
But if you are convinced that the post is totally wrong, and since you are an apparent expert in this field,I will defer to your view that everything was totally proper with the proceedings, and that no rational person could suggest otherwise
I was not aware, until you just pointed it out, that such a complex, multi-layered matter can be easily evaluated by saying that your post is 100% right and the other post is 100% wrong.
Well, welcome to your rigid, black-and-white, no nuance or shades of gray world.
And such rigidity is aptly demonstrated by your rather controlling dictate that one should not feel free to discuss anything but the suggested enumerated topics.
Again, you may be totally right as to your conclusions(and you certainly seem to have the knowledge, I grant you that) but your sledge-hammer annihilation of anyone not immediately in 100% lock step with your pronouncements suggests that your knowledge may need to be tempered by greater inter-personal skill development, and more think-outside-the box initiative and creativity, as well as far greater respect for others' view points.
By the way, I have known many lawyers and judges who were revered and very well-respected and well-liked, who seemed to be mediocre legal minds at best. Their secret? Everyone points out how respectful they were to differing opinions.
But I'm wasting your time and mine time because you are convinced I'm an idiot, so let's leave it at that.
It looks like those are simply test entries. Just a fast check of a couple of them against the State Bar membership records does not list them as members of the bar. Probably just the election department testing the system prior to the opening of filing next Monday.
Guest
Anonymous
January 3, 2020 7:32 pm
I don't think anyone can file for judge till this coming Monday, the 6th
Guest
Anonymous
January 3, 2020 9:53 pm
Since there will be 6 new family departments, the question begs to be answered: do you have to have family law experience to run for family court? Obvs. the answer is no, but should you have the experience?
Guest
Anonymous
January 4, 2020 12:17 am
Mixed results. Judge Linda Marquis did not have family court experience and is easily one of the best judges on the bench. Judge Pomrenze did not have family court and is easily one of the worst family court judges (ever). I think it depends on the person, their willingness to patiently slog through family court pleadings, hear matters fairly and impartially as well as their general legal acumen.
Guest
Anonymous
January 4, 2020 2:47 am
Does anyone else find it peculiar that Marwan Porter is not licensed until Nevada, though the Cochran firm’s website says he is?
Guest
Anonymous
January 4, 2020 11:36 pm
Allan Capps suspended by Supreme Court pending investigation that $200,000 went missing from his Trust Account. Case 80269 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF ALLAN P. CAPPS
If the bar had ANY idea who was short in their trust accounts, it would BLOW your mind. Its the rule and not the exception. I think that the Bar NEEDS to do random audits of trust accounts and annual if you have ever has an issue in the past.
I think that they really jumped the gun by conducting these hearings concerning these two judges.
It's apparent(if not obvious) that they cannot meet the highly rigorous standard to justify an immediate indefinite suspension, so to save face they are keeping it open for further "investigation."
Ordinarily, any all "investigation" is completed(and then double and triple checked and verified) before proceedings are initiated. And this should be even more true in cases where such dramatic relief(immediate suspension) is sought.
But, in this case not only did they initiate the proceedings prior to having these supposed "investigations" completed, but they actually conducted the two days of hearings.
So, once they realize that they cannot establish that the profanity, or the interference with administrative/clerical assignments, constitute any meaningful violations, rather than clearing the two judges, they keep it open so they can further "investigate."
"Investigate" what? I'm sure every clerk who wants to weigh in against these judges has already been interviewed and cooperated with the process.
I guess due process, and other protections, in some of these administrative matters(even when one's career and reputation is at stake) will never remotely approximate the due process that attaches to criminal proceedings. Can you imagine a criminal case wherein the jury is advised that they can choose between guilty, not guilty, or leaving the matter open indefinitely to see if the state's evidence dramatically improves based on possible subsequent "investigation"?
BTW, I think that the one judge may have created a real precarious professional and political situation for herself with that whole crusade and accusations against METRO and the D.A.'s Office. But that matter was only tangentially at issue in these proceedings.
These proceedings were chiefly centered on the use of profanity and mistreatment of clerical staff, and improper interference with clerical/administrative matters and assignments. And nothing of that sort was remotely established to the level of serious ethical violations, yet the dark cloud will continue to hang.
And before we indicate we don't care because they are judges, and perhaps judges disliked by sections of the Bar, we should realize this same approach may possibly become more common in Bar proceedings against attorneys, if the State Bar sees a certain trend in proceedings against judges.If judges now lack certain basic protections, you can bet attorneys will be at far greater risk when their professional actions attract disciplinary proceedings.
12:53 WOW – wordy
Not even today's topic.
You may not know that the process has two different exit points at which the Commission could have issued a private reprimand or caution letter. The Commission members are not stupid people and they must have thought there was enough to go forward with the last step in the process – a public hearing.
Vendetta
Well said.
Who the fuck is in charge at the commission? This pisses me off.
2:43. Yes, I am the author of the wordy, and apparently moronic, post. True, the Commission is not composed of stupid people, and yes, the options you mentioned are available. But I think it is arguably a valid point that it may have been filed prematurely if after the hearings there is still a need for investigation.
But if you are convinced that the post is totally wrong, and since you are an apparent expert in this field,I will defer to your view that everything was totally proper with the proceedings, and that no rational person could suggest otherwise
I was not aware, until you just pointed it out, that such a complex, multi-layered matter can be easily evaluated by saying that your post is 100% right and the other post is 100% wrong.
Well, welcome to your rigid, black-and-white, no nuance or shades of gray world.
And such rigidity is aptly demonstrated by your rather controlling dictate that one should not feel free to discuss anything but the suggested enumerated topics.
Again, you may be totally right as to your conclusions(and you certainly seem to have the knowledge, I grant you that) but your sledge-hammer annihilation of anyone not immediately in 100% lock step with your pronouncements suggests that your knowledge may need to be tempered by greater inter-personal skill development, and more think-outside-the box initiative and creativity, as well as far greater respect for others' view points.
By the way, I have known many lawyers and judges who were revered and very well-respected and well-liked, who seemed to be mediocre legal minds at best. Their secret? Everyone points out how respectful they were to differing opinions.
But I'm wasting your time and mine time because you are convinced I'm an idiot, so let's leave it at that.
There have already been 10 people file to run for judge. https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/election/Pages/CandidateFiling.aspx
It looks like those are simply test entries. Just a fast check of a couple of them against the State Bar membership records does not list them as members of the bar. Probably just the election department testing the system prior to the opening of filing next Monday.
I don't think anyone can file for judge till this coming Monday, the 6th
Since there will be 6 new family departments, the question begs to be answered: do you have to have family law experience to run for family court? Obvs. the answer is no, but should you have the experience?
Mixed results. Judge Linda Marquis did not have family court experience and is easily one of the best judges on the bench. Judge Pomrenze did not have family court and is easily one of the worst family court judges (ever). I think it depends on the person, their willingness to patiently slog through family court pleadings, hear matters fairly and impartially as well as their general legal acumen.
Does anyone else find it peculiar that Marwan Porter is not licensed until Nevada, though the Cochran firm’s website says he is?
Allan Capps suspended by Supreme Court pending investigation that $200,000 went missing from his Trust Account. Case 80269 IN RE: DISCIPLINE OF ALLAN P. CAPPS
Are you fucking kidding me??? He is the last one I would suspect.
Ditto.
If the bar had ANY idea who was short in their trust accounts, it would BLOW your mind. Its the rule and not the exception. I think that the Bar NEEDS to do random audits of trust accounts and annual if you have ever has an issue in the past.
Thanks, Hardesty.