Justice of the Peace Melanie Andress-Tobiasson was tearful before the Commission on Judicial Discipline. [RJ]
The Supreme Court of Nevada added a note to Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 8.4 to clarify that because federal law still prohibits it, the use of marijuana by attorneys could result in discipline. [TNI]
Property owners adjacent to the Badlands Golf Course are appealing their property assessments. [RJ]
Whitney Selert, of Fisher Phillips, offers his tips on office romance. Do you have any advice? [Vegas Inc.]
Cry in public: fired!
NVSCT should be ashamed of itself. Toking is a right. Back off, fascists.
The county over assesses everyone, so cheers to the heroic efforts of property owners.
I would never and have never shat where I eat.
Guest
Anonymous
February 13, 2017 6:14 pm
Nice job Nevada Supreme Court. Put out an ADKT amending "Rule of Professional Responsibility 1.2". We have Rules of Professional Conduct. The ADKT amends RPC 8.4, not Rule 1.2.
Guest
Anonymous
February 13, 2017 6:56 pm
Who here has had an office romance? Ended well or ended poorly?
We had one at our firm several years ago. It was actually an intra-office romance between two lawyers. They met when they collaborated on a case together. After the case ended, they began scheduling reasons to travel to each other's offices to prolong the affair. One of them ended up leaving their spouse for their office lover. The other one wised up and cut the affair off. The one who left the spouse was later fired. Ouch.
Guest
Anonymous
February 13, 2017 6:59 pm
Didn't Justice of the Peace Melanie Andres Tobiasson run for reelection/retention recently? Why didn't we hear about this because it is several years old. If Halverson had done this (and she did things which were much less) they would have immediately commenced proceedings. The discipline the Judicial Commission is seeking is nothing more than a slap on the wrist. They should be seeking a greater sanction. Why is this even going to hearing? Can't the parties work it out with a finding and a submittal. What is going on here?
Guest
Anonymous
February 13, 2017 7:45 pm
Stay the fuck away from all male lawyers as a typical rule.
Suggestion: Get a desk that is at least 72" long and at least 32" deep. And make it a real wood desk, not those plywood, DIY jobbies. Otherwise they just don't hold up under the pounding. Also be careful if you use a glass top on your desk.
That's always a hard one; on the one hand the company will argue that it would not have issued the policy had it known of an actual or potential claim, but on the other there is a public interest at stake. Hard cases make bad law.
Public interest has nothing to do with whether an insurable risk was created. The Client Security Fund is supposed to be concerned with public interest; an insurance policy is concerned with covering the risks contracted.
Guest
Anonymous
February 15, 2017 3:35 am
So, what do you do if you know of an attorney who smokes marijuana in the workplace while working on client matters? Isn't that unethical?
No more unethical than the attorney who knocks back a few drinks at lunch in the middle of a deposition and then drives back to the deposition. It is legal to consume (under state law) but use could lead to a violation of SCR 111.
No joke. I have tried a couple of two martini lunches, and it actually takes th edge off. Problem is I worry two will turn to three will turn to four will turn to…..
Cry in public: fired!
NVSCT should be ashamed of itself. Toking is a right. Back off, fascists.
The county over assesses everyone, so cheers to the heroic efforts of property owners.
I would never and have never shat where I eat.
Nice job Nevada Supreme Court. Put out an ADKT amending "Rule of Professional Responsibility 1.2". We have Rules of Professional Conduct. The ADKT amends RPC 8.4, not Rule 1.2.
Who here has had an office romance? Ended well or ended poorly?
We had one at our firm several years ago. It was actually an intra-office romance between two lawyers. They met when they collaborated on a case together. After the case ended, they began scheduling reasons to travel to each other's offices to prolong the affair. One of them ended up leaving their spouse for their office lover. The other one wised up and cut the affair off. The one who left the spouse was later fired. Ouch.
Didn't Justice of the Peace Melanie Andres Tobiasson run for reelection/retention recently? Why didn't we hear about this because it is several years old. If Halverson had done this (and she did things which were much less) they would have immediately commenced proceedings. The discipline the Judicial Commission is seeking is nothing more than a slap on the wrist. They should be seeking a greater sanction. Why is this even going to hearing? Can't the parties work it out with a finding and a submittal. What is going on here?
Stay the fuck away from all male lawyers as a typical rule.
Ditto for female ones. They are good for recreational fornication, but very few of them are wife material.
Also female lawyers. In fact, the key to happiness is spending as few minutes of your life around lawyers as possible.
Suggestion: Get a desk that is at least 72" long and at least 32" deep. And make it a real wood desk, not those plywood, DIY jobbies. Otherwise they just don't hold up under the pounding. Also be careful if you use a glass top on your desk.
New Graham stuff: his E&O carrier moves to void the $2M policy:
"Lawyers for the Virgina-based Markel Insurance Company allege in the documents that Graham, 52, lied when he filled out an application for the policy in December 2015 saying he knew of no professional liability claims against him."
http://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/company-wants-void-indicted-lawyer-robert-graham-s-malpractice-insurance
That's always a hard one; on the one hand the company will argue that it would not have issued the policy had it known of an actual or potential claim, but on the other there is a public interest at stake. Hard cases make bad law.
Public interest has nothing to do with whether an insurable risk was created. The Client Security Fund is supposed to be concerned with public interest; an insurance policy is concerned with covering the risks contracted.
So, what do you do if you know of an attorney who smokes marijuana in the workplace while working on client matters? Isn't that unethical?
No more unethical than the attorney who knocks back a few drinks at lunch in the middle of a deposition and then drives back to the deposition. It is legal to consume (under state law) but use could lead to a violation of SCR 111.
7:35, you ask him to share his weed, so you can be happy too.
So that's what I'm doing wrong! I should be drinking mid-day, not at the end of the day!
No joke. I have tried a couple of two martini lunches, and it actually takes th edge off. Problem is I worry two will turn to three will turn to four will turn to…..
Let the bodies hit the floor!
Ahem