Look up consumer protection. It exists. You cannot blame the jurist, can you?
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 3:51 pm
The game last night was awesome. Great energy from both teams the whole time. Glad to see the Knights win it in the end though.
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 4:19 pm
Senator Dr. Aaron Ford works for Eglet Prince.
He is a Senator in the Nevada Legislature.
He recently pushed through an amendment to a bill which would eliminate the caps on attorney fees which the State can pay to outside legal counsel.
This bill would benefit Eglet Prince, which wants to handle the opioid cases among other mass torts.
Once Ford is Attorney General, he can assign cases to Eglet Prince.
In exchange Eglet Prince can finance his campaign for attorney general, as well as his future campaigns for governor and/or senator.
A vote for Ford is a vote for Robert Eglet.
The AG did not select eglet prince for the opiod case. Clark and Washoe County did. Before you start spouting off conspiracy theories at least get the facts straight. Granted our president doesn't, but you are better than that.
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 4:52 pm
It's been a toss-up for me, between Cadish and Tao. But I think, after reading those submissions to the Guide for Voting, I've made up my mind. How about you guys?
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 7:08 pm
Stiglich collected $530K in contributions $10K from Brian Sandoval. Every large law firm put $2.5K to $5K. How do you call it?
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 7:18 pm
I am voting to Tao. I don't care how much Cadish raised.
Let's see, according to commenters on this blog, although judicial positions are "nonpartisan", Cadish is too liberal (on guns) and too conservative on other issues (banks/consumer laws?). On the other hand, Tao is a lifelong registered dem, an affiliation he kept when he was running for district court and for the COA; but he suddenly became unaffiliated, received a bunch of republican endorsements, and is running based on scare tactics that the Court has become too left leaning. I think Tao has been a decent judge who may be a bit self-indulgent in his opinions – but who knows now? How can anyone believe what he says?
Despite the one or two anti-Cadish crusaders who repeatedly comment here, I've always thought Cadish was one of the better district court judges – particularly in commercial/complex civil litigation cases. Based only upon Tao's statements and actions over the past few months, I will take Cadish one hundred times out of one hundred over Tao.
I believe what Tao says over Elissa. The judicial races should be non-partisan. He is being crucified by Dave Thomas' buddy, Jane Morrison, idiot columnist over at the RJ.
We were at a recent event with Judge Cadish and her huband, Howard. All he could do was brag about her connections to Harry Reid and telling us how she was a Dem. He was very off putting.
Amen, no Cadish for me. At least Howard has no power, Elissa does and she is worse.
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 7:40 pm
Thoughts on Leverty's farewell column in the new Nevada Lawyer. He states that the bar works transparently and that you only need to contact a governor to learn more. He also applauds Kim Farmer and talks about 34 meetings he held with Nevada law firms.
I was recently in a social setting with an incumbent BOG (now on the ballot) who complained that members of the Bar should speak up more with concerns.
@1:12— Your BOG friend is full of shit and its the same shit that Leverty was pumping in his column. There is no transparency. Members of the Bar have been voicing our concerns. BoG does not listen and does not care.
Man, Hunterton was no day, at the beach
You got some issues Stan, I think you need some counseling
To help you from bouncing off the walls when you get down some
And what's this ish about posing with the shark?
That type of ish will make me not want to accept a stipulated discipline
I really think you and the BOG need each other
Or maybe you just need to treat attorneys better.
I hope you get to read this letter, I just hope it reaches you in time
Before you go work at Lipson Nielson or whatever, I think that you'll be doin' just fine
Even if you put it in two places, still pretty clever. Lipson Neilson is not taking Stan. Shady Acres is the only place he will be moving on to occupy.
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 8:47 pm
I expected Cadish to raise more than Tao, but the discrepancy is a lot larger than I anticipated–$370,000. for Cadish, and $60,000. for Tao.
Tao's explanation was kind of lame. He asserts Cadish started earlier. But he never indicates he will catch up or at least close the gap significantly. He pretty much concedes Cadish will raise a lot more, but then says that the voters, rather than money, will ultimately decide the race. But he never explains why he would be better, or why people wish to give a lot more financial support to his opponent than to him.
Also, he keeps getting pounded in these articles for switching parties–which the articles indicate was done so he can distance himself from Harry Reid plus receive endorsements from prominent republicans.
And that all looks very artificial and self-serving on his part, particularly since he really does not respond to it. It looks like his philosophy is to increase his vote tally at the cost of any political philosophies or values he has.
So, if this is not merely a case of switching political parties based on political opportunism, and he really has some honest and sincere transformations as to his beliefs and value system, he needs to directly address that.
Instead, in article after article, the lingering impression is that he wants to run away from his past life as a Reid speech writer and loyal supporter, and now wants to curry favor with the Republican power base.
And even that is a little muddled since he did not switch from Democrat to Republican, but instead from Democrat to Independent(or non-partisan or whatever it was). And then that additional somewhat confusing dynamic is explained that Tao wants to run from his Democrat past and receive the support and endorsements of prominent republicans, but he lacks the full guts of his convictions since he does not change to Republican, but instead changes to Independent–meaning the entire time that he is trying to distance himself from his Democrat past, he still believes he can maintain a lot of democratic voters if he does not completely switch sides, but only half-way.
It does all appear like clumsy political posturing. And if it is not, and there are sound philosophical reasons for the decision, Tao needs to speak up because, IMO, he could make an excellent jurist.
His written decisions are too verbose at times, but I think he is really good, and would be even better at the next level as he continues to develop.
But he may never get that chance because his campaign approach, and his "message", really, really sucks. He needs to get his campaign and message in order.
To me, less money you get the less corrupt you are. What is the link for the Nevada Supreme Court campaign contributions?
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 9:36 pm
To:2:18. In general I might accept your premise that the less money someone raises the more clean they appear from a political perspective–they are possibly less beholden to supporters and donors, etc.
But as 1:47 points out in detail, there are compromising factors beyond money. If a candidate is supported and endorsed by prominent state-wide
office-holders, some may question where a candidate's true allegiance lies.
All candidates will claim they are beholden to no one except the people and the voters. So, voters, ideally, need to make their own assessment of each race and decide which candidate is more responsive to serving the people, as opposed to which ones cater to a political agenda, political party, or other prominent office holders.
But I expect too much of voters as most voters vote by party line, or name recognition, or something of that sort.
As to the specific election of Tao, I believe, as does 1:47, that Tao is a sold, highly ethical jurist. But I also agree, as 1:47 points out, that Tao needs to better address some of these issues.
I also happen to think Cadish is quite capable, although she doe not seem to attract too much love on this blog.
But I don't think things are as gloomy as 1:47 indicates. But if they are that gloomy, there is a lot of time and room for improvement as the Tao/Cadish race will not be decided till November.
But
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 9:40 pm
Cadish has a lot of debt. She is also getting the maximum contribution in Eglet money.
Guest
Anonymous
May 29, 2018 9:44 pm
A general election question, can a candidate use their money from one election candidate to contribute to another? I thought that was illegal.
3:00/3:24/3:50/4:32/6:16-most of the people on this blog are lawyers. Many of us (not all, of course) have decent logic and reasoning abilities. You should peddle your wares elsewhere.
11:45 is right in the spelling. Don't worry, Cadish, we already know you cannot even handle the most menial tasks such as a job application or applying the law.
"People often confuse the words pedal and peddle. Pedal is a noun referring to a foot-operated lever, as on a bicycle, and a verb chiefly meaning ‘move by working the pedals of a bicycle’ (they pedalled along the road). Peddle, on the other hand, is a verb meaning ‘sell goods or promote an idea’ (he peddled printing materials around the country she peddled a ludicrously Utopian view of the past). The related words pedlar and pedaller are also confused. A pedlar (also spelled peddler, especially in the US) is a person who goes from place to place selling goods; the word for a person who sells illegal drugs or stolen goods (or, metaphorically, who promotes an idea or view) is generally spelled peddler. A pedaller (or, in the US, a pedaler) is someone who rides a bike."
I like Tao quite a bit, and Cadish often demonstrates a sharp judicial mind. So, contrary to what some doom-sayers are predicting, I think we will be at least reasonably well-served with either of them.
But I agree with 1:47. Tao's campaign approach needs a complete over-haul
Cadish will presumably use a lot of her vastly superior war chest to blanket the air waves with commercials. The voters will notice all these ads, her name identification will be continually increased and reinforced, as well as the fact that she is the female candidate(which helps quite a bit in most judicial races). Unlike some of the bloggers here, the average voter will not know, or care, what law firms contributed to her campaign.
But Tao, on the other hand, will have only a fraction of Cadish's money, and will need to spend whatever he has on now trying to re-define himself after the media has continuously defined him in a negative fashion.As 1:47 emphasizes, Tao seems to offer very little resistance when these articles continually paint him as a Harry Reid loyalist who now wishes to disavow all those who helped him politically in the past, including those who helped him be appointed to two judgeships. And this seems to be done largely on account that he perceived he needed to switch parties to secure the endorsements of prominent republicans.
His deep democratic connections certainly helped him achieve his two judicial posts. Although he was appointed by a Republican governor, he is perceived a centrist Republican, and one who will on occasion appoint democrats to judgeships. So,Tao's past connections and accomplishments, including those of a political nature associated with him being active in the democratic party, certainly helped his trajectory.
But now it looks like he is ashamed of having ever been a democrat, and seems particularly fixated with saying, in essence: hey voting public, please, please forget that I was ever a paid employee of the office of Harry Reid. Since most of you guys don't like him, I will tell you what you want to hear, and disassociate myself from Reid.
His explanation is that his time with Reid was some time ago, so he scrubbed it from his resume. But his time working for the DA and PD was also some time ago. Has he eliminated that, and his other older accomplishments, from his resume? I think not.
So, will the real Jerry Tao stand up and explain and define himself? So far, it looks like he is okay with the media negatively defining him, and the Cadish campaign may well take the same approach, and certainly has the cash to do so.
Guest
Anonymous
May 30, 2018 12:02 am
Why does the SAME PERSON keep posting long winded dissertations while pretending to be different people – often times agreeing with his/her prior posts, posing questions to himself/herself, etc. And calling Tao verbose, truly comical. I never get past the first sentence of your posts.
Just look for the posts with: multiple paragraphs; numerous sentences that begin with "But"; frequent use of "So," no space between the open parenthesis and the preceding word.
In response to 5:02. It seems to be the only effective way he/she can get someone to agree with them.
People who debate with themselves at least have someone who agree with them. This situation you mention, though, is particularly curious as the person seems to disagree with themselves as much as they agree with themselves. We might want to leave that one for someone with psychological training to decipher.
5:08: It's better to be a lion for a day than a sheep all your life.
Guest
Anonymous
May 30, 2018 1:22 am
I actually like both Tao and Cadish. Wouldn't mind either of them. But Cadish's JEA has ticked me off too many times over the years. I don't mind a JEA enforcing rules and deadlines; in fact, I appreciate it. But the rude manner in which he interacts with attorneys and, more importantly, their assistants is completely unnecessary and unjustified. I can take it, but don't be a jerk to my assistants, dude. I know I am not the only one, since it seems like everyone I speak with has generally the same opinion. Since I like them both, I am going to vote for Tao, just to tick him off.
Sounds like we should vote for Cadish to get rid of her JEA. There's not that much room for jerking attorneys and assistants around a justice's chamber.
Sounds more like a reason to vote for Cadish. If she wins, the JEA will either retire, move to another Department (assuming there is an opening and anyone wants him), or go with her to the NSC, where he will have little to no interaction with lawyers or their staff. So if she wins, there's at least a 2/3 chance that he goes away.
Agreed 11:01. JEAs at the NSC (or JCAs) have almost no interaction with attorneys. That's all done through the Clerk's Office. Problem solved.
Guest
Anonymous
May 30, 2018 1:28 am
The judges need to remember that lawyers don't decide who to support solely on courtroom performance of the judge or decisions of the judge.
For some lawyers, interaction with support staff is a major factor. It is important to have a staff that helps attorneys and litigants, rather than jamming them up
Guest
Anonymous
May 30, 2018 4:04 am
Oh I would love to know if there was an offer of judgment in the Copperfield case.
Elissa Cadish should not be elected to the Nevada Supreme Court. She does not believe in consumer protection laws.
8:45 — W T H are you talking about ??
Look up consumer protection. It exists. You cannot blame the jurist, can you?
The game last night was awesome. Great energy from both teams the whole time. Glad to see the Knights win it in the end though.
Senator Dr. Aaron Ford works for Eglet Prince.
He is a Senator in the Nevada Legislature.
He recently pushed through an amendment to a bill which would eliminate the caps on attorney fees which the State can pay to outside legal counsel.
This bill would benefit Eglet Prince, which wants to handle the opioid cases among other mass torts.
Once Ford is Attorney General, he can assign cases to Eglet Prince.
In exchange Eglet Prince can finance his campaign for attorney general, as well as his future campaigns for governor and/or senator.
A vote for Ford is a vote for Robert Eglet.
Everything you have written should persuade voters to not vote for Dr. Ford which means he will win.
Share a link the the amendment please
So who should we vote for then? Laxalt disciple Wes Duncan? I'll take some alleged self-dealing over a ring wing crazy any day.
Agreed
Senator Dr Aaron Ford, friend of Harry Reid, oh hello no.
Years ago, I had Wes Duncan as opposing counsel when he worked for Lee Drizin. On a personal level, he was a nice guy and great to work with.
I take it you've never met Wes. He's pretty low key, much different from Adam. Ralston even likes him if that tells you anything.
Do we know when he worked at that firm, 12:22? Curious to know if it was the same time April Parks worked there.
The AG did not select eglet prince for the opiod case. Clark and Washoe County did. Before you start spouting off conspiracy theories at least get the facts straight. Granted our president doesn't, but you are better than that.
It's been a toss-up for me, between Cadish and Tao. But I think, after reading those submissions to the Guide for Voting, I've made up my mind. How about you guys?
Stiglich collected $530K in contributions $10K from Brian Sandoval. Every large law firm put $2.5K to $5K. How do you call it?
I am voting to Tao. I don't care how much Cadish raised.
for
Let's see, according to commenters on this blog, although judicial positions are "nonpartisan", Cadish is too liberal (on guns) and too conservative on other issues (banks/consumer laws?). On the other hand, Tao is a lifelong registered dem, an affiliation he kept when he was running for district court and for the COA; but he suddenly became unaffiliated, received a bunch of republican endorsements, and is running based on scare tactics that the Court has become too left leaning. I think Tao has been a decent judge who may be a bit self-indulgent in his opinions – but who knows now? How can anyone believe what he says?
Despite the one or two anti-Cadish crusaders who repeatedly comment here, I've always thought Cadish was one of the better district court judges – particularly in commercial/complex civil litigation cases. Based only upon Tao's statements and actions over the past few months, I will take Cadish one hundred times out of one hundred over Tao.
I believe what Tao says over Elissa. The judicial races should be non-partisan. He is being crucified by Dave Thomas' buddy, Jane Morrison, idiot columnist over at the RJ.
We were at a recent event with Judge Cadish and her huband, Howard. All he could do was brag about her connections to Harry Reid and telling us how she was a Dem. He was very off putting.
But surely the sins of the husband aren't the sins of the spouse, are they?
She does not keep control of her staff or her court room, so this would not surprise me.
Double ick on Howard a/k/a Mr. Cadish. I would not want him anywhere near my campaign if I were her. She would be better off bringing the evil JEA.
Amen, no Cadish for me. At least Howard has no power, Elissa does and she is worse.
Thoughts on Leverty's farewell column in the new Nevada Lawyer. He states that the bar works transparently and that you only need to contact a governor to learn more. He also applauds Kim Farmer and talks about 34 meetings he held with Nevada law firms.
Sounds to me like he reads the blog, or at least was made aware of the complaints voiced here.
Rumor that Stan Hunterton no longer at OBC. Anyone know if true, what happened, who in charge?
I was recently in a social setting with an incumbent BOG (now on the ballot) who complained that members of the Bar should speak up more with concerns.
https://www.nvbar.org/contact/office-bar-counsel-contacts/
Leverty is full of it. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
1:03 & 1:24 seem to be saying that Hunterton out as Bar Counsel. Any info?
https://www.nvbar.org/find-a-lawyer/?usearch=Hunterton Still listed as OBC in the bar directory.
Janeen Isaacson is "Acting Bar Counsel" according to my little birdy employee at the State Bar.
@1:12— Your BOG friend is full of shit and its the same shit that Leverty was pumping in his column. There is no transparency. Members of the Bar have been voicing our concerns. BoG does not listen and does not care.
Man, Hunterton was no day, at the beach
You got some issues Stan, I think you need some counseling
To help you from bouncing off the walls when you get down some
And what's this ish about posing with the shark?
That type of ish will make me not want to accept a stipulated discipline
I really think you and the BOG need each other
Or maybe you just need to treat attorneys better.
I hope you get to read this letter, I just hope it reaches you in time
Before you go work at Lipson Nielson or whatever, I think that you'll be doin' just fine
Even if you put it in two places, still pretty clever. Lipson Neilson is not taking Stan. Shady Acres is the only place he will be moving on to occupy.
I expected Cadish to raise more than Tao, but the discrepancy is a lot larger than I anticipated–$370,000. for Cadish, and $60,000. for Tao.
Tao's explanation was kind of lame. He asserts Cadish started earlier. But he never indicates he will catch up or at least close the gap significantly. He pretty much concedes Cadish will raise a lot more, but then says that the voters, rather than money, will ultimately decide the race. But he never explains why he would be better, or why people wish to give a lot more financial support to his opponent than to him.
Also, he keeps getting pounded in these articles for switching parties–which the articles indicate was done so he can distance himself from Harry Reid plus receive endorsements from prominent republicans.
And that all looks very artificial and self-serving on his part, particularly since he really does not respond to it. It looks like his philosophy is to increase his vote tally at the cost of any political philosophies or values he has.
So, if this is not merely a case of switching political parties based on political opportunism, and he really has some honest and sincere transformations as to his beliefs and value system, he needs to directly address that.
Instead, in article after article, the lingering impression is that he wants to run away from his past life as a Reid speech writer and loyal supporter, and now wants to curry favor with the Republican power base.
And even that is a little muddled since he did not switch from Democrat to Republican, but instead from Democrat to Independent(or non-partisan or whatever it was). And then that additional somewhat confusing dynamic is explained that Tao wants to run from his Democrat past and receive the support and endorsements of prominent republicans, but he lacks the full guts of his convictions since he does not change to Republican, but instead changes to Independent–meaning the entire time that he is trying to distance himself from his Democrat past, he still believes he can maintain a lot of democratic voters if he does not completely switch sides, but only half-way.
It does all appear like clumsy political posturing. And if it is not, and there are sound philosophical reasons for the decision, Tao needs to speak up because, IMO, he could make an excellent jurist.
His written decisions are too verbose at times, but I think he is really good, and would be even better at the next level as he continues to develop.
But he may never get that chance because his campaign approach, and his "message", really, really sucks. He needs to get his campaign and message in order.
To me, less money you get the less corrupt you are. What is the link for the Nevada Supreme Court campaign contributions?
To:2:18. In general I might accept your premise that the less money someone raises the more clean they appear from a political perspective–they are possibly less beholden to supporters and donors, etc.
But as 1:47 points out in detail, there are compromising factors beyond money. If a candidate is supported and endorsed by prominent state-wide
office-holders, some may question where a candidate's true allegiance lies.
All candidates will claim they are beholden to no one except the people and the voters. So, voters, ideally, need to make their own assessment of each race and decide which candidate is more responsive to serving the people, as opposed to which ones cater to a political agenda, political party, or other prominent office holders.
But I expect too much of voters as most voters vote by party line, or name recognition, or something of that sort.
As to the specific election of Tao, I believe, as does 1:47, that Tao is a sold, highly ethical jurist. But I also agree, as 1:47 points out, that Tao needs to better address some of these issues.
I also happen to think Cadish is quite capable, although she doe not seem to attract too much love on this blog.
But I don't think things are as gloomy as 1:47 indicates. But if they are that gloomy, there is a lot of time and room for improvement as the Tao/Cadish race will not be decided till November.
But
Cadish has a lot of debt. She is also getting the maximum contribution in Eglet money.
A general election question, can a candidate use their money from one election candidate to contribute to another? I thought that was illegal.
It is. Report it.
Maybe it should be illegal, but it's not. NRS 294A.160.
You guys should look at Judge E Cadish's campaign reporting. Very interesting. Judge for yourself.
Oh, honey, I hope you're getting paid for this. Otherwise it's just too depressing to contemplate.
What, 3;20, are you afraid of transparency?
https://www.nvsos.gov/SOSCandidateServices/AnonymousAccess/CEFDSearch/CandidateDetails.aspx?o=NpbUADKKWcdU619Wf6%252bDlg%253d%253d
Cadish accepted a campaign contribution from Alexis Plunkett.
So?
Isn't that the lawyer who was having sex in the prison with her client?
So?
Right, take money from anyone.
3:00/3:24/3:50/4:32/6:16-most of the people on this blog are lawyers. Many of us (not all, of course) have decent logic and reasoning abilities. You should peddle your wares elsewhere.
Decent logic? Thank you for the laugh. I would be worried about the election too, Elissa Cadish.
It is pedal. I cannot vote for someone who cannot spell.
11:45 — We assume you're joking, rather than an illiterate.
11:45 is right in the spelling. Don't worry, Cadish, we already know you cannot even handle the most menial tasks such as a job application or applying the law.
It is spelled both ways, so get a life 7:06.
From the Oxford online dictionary:
"People often confuse the words pedal and peddle. Pedal is a noun referring to a foot-operated lever, as on a bicycle, and a verb chiefly meaning ‘move by working the pedals of a bicycle’ (they pedalled along the road). Peddle, on the other hand, is a verb meaning ‘sell goods or promote an idea’ (he peddled printing materials around the country she peddled a ludicrously Utopian view of the past). The related words pedlar and pedaller are also confused. A pedlar (also spelled peddler, especially in the US) is a person who goes from place to place selling goods; the word for a person who sells illegal drugs or stolen goods (or, metaphorically, who promotes an idea or view) is generally spelled peddler. A pedaller (or, in the US, a pedaler) is someone who rides a bike."
Lame, I know, but I'm sharing anyway.
8:13 — Thank you for the clarification. 7:42 and 7:53 — I hope your legal briefs make you look smarter than your blogs. Petal to the meddle!!
Exclamation mark is back. Do they use exclamation marks a lot at Penn? Still cannot spell or punctuate at the Ivy.
A brief is not the same as blogging, but we have a prize for you anyway. Background music.
8:33 — !! (signed, Exclamation Mark)
8:41 — Brilliant insight about a brief being different from a blog. I'll take that cheese burger now. 😉
12:14, yawn.
I know I'm late to the party, but petal to the meddle made me LOL. Also, 11:45, 7:42, and 7:53 are bad and should feel bad.
I am voting for Steve Sisolak.
Thanks for letting us know!
I like Tao quite a bit, and Cadish often demonstrates a sharp judicial mind. So, contrary to what some doom-sayers are predicting, I think we will be at least reasonably well-served with either of them.
But I agree with 1:47. Tao's campaign approach needs a complete over-haul
Cadish will presumably use a lot of her vastly superior war chest to blanket the air waves with commercials. The voters will notice all these ads, her name identification will be continually increased and reinforced, as well as the fact that she is the female candidate(which helps quite a bit in most judicial races). Unlike some of the bloggers here, the average voter will not know, or care, what law firms contributed to her campaign.
But Tao, on the other hand, will have only a fraction of Cadish's money, and will need to spend whatever he has on now trying to re-define himself after the media has continuously defined him in a negative fashion.As 1:47 emphasizes, Tao seems to offer very little resistance when these articles continually paint him as a Harry Reid loyalist who now wishes to disavow all those who helped him politically in the past, including those who helped him be appointed to two judgeships. And this seems to be done largely on account that he perceived he needed to switch parties to secure the endorsements of prominent republicans.
His deep democratic connections certainly helped him achieve his two judicial posts. Although he was appointed by a Republican governor, he is perceived a centrist Republican, and one who will on occasion appoint democrats to judgeships. So,Tao's past connections and accomplishments, including those of a political nature associated with him being active in the democratic party, certainly helped his trajectory.
But now it looks like he is ashamed of having ever been a democrat, and seems particularly fixated with saying, in essence: hey voting public, please, please forget that I was ever a paid employee of the office of Harry Reid. Since most of you guys don't like him, I will tell you what you want to hear, and disassociate myself from Reid.
His explanation is that his time with Reid was some time ago, so he scrubbed it from his resume. But his time working for the DA and PD was also some time ago. Has he eliminated that, and his other older accomplishments, from his resume? I think not.
So, will the real Jerry Tao stand up and explain and define himself? So far, it looks like he is okay with the media negatively defining him, and the Cadish campaign may well take the same approach, and certainly has the cash to do so.
Why does the SAME PERSON keep posting long winded dissertations while pretending to be different people – often times agreeing with his/her prior posts, posing questions to himself/herself, etc. And calling Tao verbose, truly comical. I never get past the first sentence of your posts.
Just look for the posts with: multiple paragraphs; numerous sentences that begin with "But"; frequent use of "So," no space between the open parenthesis and the preceding word.
evidently not a knights fan since lots of capital letters
In response to 5:02. It seems to be the only effective way he/she can get someone to agree with them.
People who debate with themselves at least have someone who agree with them. This situation you mention, though, is particularly curious as the person seems to disagree with themselves as much as they agree with themselves. We might want to leave that one for someone with psychological training to decipher.
5:08: It's better to be a lion for a day than a sheep all your life.
I actually like both Tao and Cadish. Wouldn't mind either of them. But Cadish's JEA has ticked me off too many times over the years. I don't mind a JEA enforcing rules and deadlines; in fact, I appreciate it. But the rude manner in which he interacts with attorneys and, more importantly, their assistants is completely unnecessary and unjustified. I can take it, but don't be a jerk to my assistants, dude. I know I am not the only one, since it seems like everyone I speak with has generally the same opinion. Since I like them both, I am going to vote for Tao, just to tick him off.
Sounds like we should vote for Cadish to get rid of her JEA. There's not that much room for jerking attorneys and assistants around a justice's chamber.
Sounds more like a reason to vote for Cadish. If she wins, the JEA will either retire, move to another Department (assuming there is an opening and anyone wants him), or go with her to the NSC, where he will have little to no interaction with lawyers or their staff. So if she wins, there's at least a 2/3 chance that he goes away.
Agreed 11:01. JEAs at the NSC (or JCAs) have almost no interaction with attorneys. That's all done through the Clerk's Office. Problem solved.
The judges need to remember that lawyers don't decide who to support solely on courtroom performance of the judge or decisions of the judge.
For some lawyers, interaction with support staff is a major factor. It is important to have a staff that helps attorneys and litigants, rather than jamming them up
Oh I would love to know if there was an offer of judgment in the Copperfield case.
This ^^^