Re: the AG case, if you're not going to pay punitive when they come up, you should get your "insured" his or her own counsel right off the bat. The AG apparently doesn't understand this concept (or simply lack the ability to value a case). I'm starting to think Ford has no understanding of what's happening in his office. This is not political, I both voted for and donated to Ford, but I expected more of him. And "no comment" is never a good look. Ford picked friends for his management team and it shows.
This is a huge conflict of interest. The AG needs to allow him to retain personal counsel at taxpayer expense if they want to advance this argument. They are hopelessly conflicted. They are arguing that their client (Groover) should be personally liable for these damages?
Do you guys even lawyer? State is immune for punitive damages pursuant to NRS 41.035. State has no duty to represent or indemnify for conduct outside of scope. Also in statute.
Even for my windshield that was cracked by a rock from a City vehicle?
Guest
Anonymous
September 5, 2023 5:13 pm
Widening roads doesn't work, it only alleviates traffic for a short time then the congestion comes back. Please, let's not feel bound to do everything LA does.
That's like saying feeding the poor only works temporarily therefore let them starve so there's fewer of them. It is a scarcity mindset and depressing.
10:37 that is not logical. Widening is at great expense and defers the solution whereas feeding is a small expense and helps ie decreases the long-term solution. Argue better my friend.
Widening roads does not solve congestion. Widening roads helps for a minute, but ultimately generates new traffic which causes congestion. See eg https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/us/widen-highways-traffic.html
Also, anyone who has been on the 15 or 215 can tell you that widening only helps push the traffic one direction or another. I have been commuting across town for 15 years and my commute time isn't getting any shorter despite the Billions put in.
Widening doesn't work because no matter how many lanes there are people are afraid to miss an exit or their turn and pack two lanes. Or wait for 5 lanes to clear to merge in the far lane becasue their turn is 3 miles away.
1148 here. Neither of these things are real arguments against widening. The real problem is the never ending battle of balancing traffic management and population growth in our community.
Of course, widening is a temp fix. But, what is the permanent fix? Spend billions or trillions of dollars that will accommodate 4 million people living here? or 5? The argument that a commute hasn't gotten any shorter in 15 years is actually evidence of the solutions working (at least somewhat), especially considering that our population has grown exponentially in the last 40 years.
What we really need is more stadiums.
Of course, any solution that balances the traffic management with population growth is by its very nature, temporary. Until you can come up with a real solution, STFU.
It used to take forever to drive from Summerlin to Anthem at any time of day. Now, I can hurtle to Henderson at lightening speeds, as long as it's not rush hour. How is progress bad? How is more people, more lanes, more cars, more prosperity bad?
At the risk of being thwacked – Willick was sued by a litigant from family court for allegedly improperly filing a lien on a company and/or some property. The matter was set for trial recently and after the jury had been selected, Willick spoke to a juror in the elevator. There is also some reference to conversations in the hallway at court, though it isn't clear what those conversations were about. Allf had to declare a mistrial based on the shenanigans. New trial date is forthcoming. Rumor is that ONJ will be publishing some of the video. ONJ will probably file a media request in the case going forward now which will be fun to watch.
So Doug Ansell (look up his criminal case on Odyssey) is suing Willick who represented his ex wife in family court and who put a list pendens on property. Poor Nancy Allf.
(1) Not a lien; it was a lis pendens which is stupid when you have a judgment because you can simply record the judgment. But a good primer that judgment liens and lis pendens serve different purposes and not to conflate them. (2) Even the Plaintiff in its Complaint seems to concede that the facial ownership of the Company was not held in Doug Ansell's name but that it was and is an Ansell company (perhaps to shield assets from Willick's client claiming an interest). (3) Anyone who has litigated in or around any of the Ansell cases or has had the pleasure of sitting in a coutroom when one of the Ansell cases comes up for hearing knows what a Smores-y treat dealing with those cases would be.
How Mr. Ansell got Steve Peek to take this case is a story I would like to hear about. Also how they planned to have a $10M Blue Heron custom home with strict residential CC&Rs become an "EB-5 Center".
I just beat Ansell and his teams of lawyers in a new state court case. Got out on a 12(b) motion to dismiss. Stupid case. Just got notice he's appealing the dismissal.
When I think of Peek, he is not just a participant in the legal field but a force of nature, like an elephant in a jungle, dominating with its intellect and energy. While others tiptoe around obstacles, he swings his metaphorical trunk from side to side, toppling barriers as if they were mere blades of grass. If an issue stands in his way? Well, he doesn't just address it; he stomps on it with the decisiveness of an elephant squashing an unfortunate melon. He doesn't navigate the field; he reshapes it, leaving a path so clear, even a marching band could follow. He's not just in the room; he is the room—oh, and he's taken down the walls for good measure!
If it's true he is retired, I wish him well, and hope it's a retirement worthy of a King.
Steve had/has a great voice. That will take you a long way as a trial attorney.
Guest
Anonymous
September 5, 2023 8:51 pm
08/24/2023 12:30 PM
– Also present: Karla Vazquez, representative for Plaintiff Haojia LLC OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY Colloquy regarding possible interaction between Defendant and juror. Court canvassed Mr. Willick and Juror # 8 separately regarding interaction in the garage elevator. Mr. Pearson moved to excuse Juror #8. Mr. Wieczorek agreed. COURT ORDERED, juror #8 EXCUSED. Colloquy regarding timing of trial. JURY PRESENT Testimony and exhibits presented. (See worksheets). COURT ORDERED, trial CONTINUED. CONTINUED TO: 8/25/2023 9:30 AM
08/25/2023 9:30 AM
– Also present: Karla Vazquez, representative for Plaintiff Haojia LLC OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY Mr. Pearson moved for mistrial regarding Mr. Willick's communication with a juror. Colloquy regarding conversations made in the hall and whether or not jury members overheard. Mr. Wieczorek noted concerns over a text from Mr. Ansell to Ms. Ansell that was regarding Mr. Willick. Opposition by Mr. Wieczorek to motion for mistrial. Court stated its findings and ORDERED, oral motion for mistrial GRANTED, trial VACATED and RESET to the next stack. JURY PRESENT Testimony and exhibits presented. (See worksheets). Court advised the jury she had declared a mistrial due to misconduct. Court thanked and excused the jury. 9/28/2023 10:30 AM CALENDAR CALL 10/9/2023 9:30 AM JURY TRIAL (STACK)
Guest
Anonymous
September 5, 2023 9:59 pm
Is the State Bar website down? I need a copy of the civil government attorneys conference agenda.
12:30 – 1:00 PM Registration/Sign-In
1:00 – 1:15 PM Welcome and Introductions
Julie Cavanaugh-Bill, Nevada State Bar President
Sarah A. Bradley, Public Lawyers’ Section Chair
1:15 – 2:15 PM Civility
Kait Flocchini, Esq. (Ethics 1.0)
2:15 – 3:15 PM The Art of Online Legal Research
Ann Walsh Long (Ethics 1.0)
3:15 – 3:30 PM Break
3:30 – 5:00 PM E-Discovery Tips and Tricks
Jon Holpuch (1.50)
5:15 – 6:45 PM Hospitality Suite
Hosted by Steven M. Silva
Re: the AG case, if you're not going to pay punitive when they come up, you should get your "insured" his or her own counsel right off the bat. The AG apparently doesn't understand this concept (or simply lack the ability to value a case). I'm starting to think Ford has no understanding of what's happening in his office. This is not political, I both voted for and donated to Ford, but I expected more of him. And "no comment" is never a good look. Ford picked friends for his management team and it shows.
If the state is equivalent to an insurer then let the guy sue the state for indemnity. Make them learn the hard way.
Remember Ford came from the Eglet fold and has the state as a Plaintiff. Ford likes big judgments and punitives as a paradigm.
This is a huge conflict of interest. The AG needs to allow him to retain personal counsel at taxpayer expense if they want to advance this argument. They are hopelessly conflicted. They are arguing that their client (Groover) should be personally liable for these damages?
The fact that Ford worked for Eglet and remains in contact with the firm means he should have known better.
False. This is Nevada where everybody is connected to somebody. Not a legitimate reason to say he knew better
Do you guys even lawyer? State is immune for punitive damages pursuant to NRS 41.035. State has no duty to represent or indemnify for conduct outside of scope. Also in statute.
Even for my windshield that was cracked by a rock from a City vehicle?
Widening roads doesn't work, it only alleviates traffic for a short time then the congestion comes back. Please, let's not feel bound to do everything LA does.
That's like saying feeding the poor only works temporarily therefore let them starve so there's fewer of them. It is a scarcity mindset and depressing.
10:37 that is not logical. Widening is at great expense and defers the solution whereas feeding is a small expense and helps ie decreases the long-term solution. Argue better my friend.
Both comments are based upon the false premise that "widening roads doesn't work". Which is an illusory argument at best.
I'm with 11:48. Y'all both need to shore up your arguments.
Widening roads does not solve congestion. Widening roads helps for a minute, but ultimately generates new traffic which causes congestion. See eg https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/us/widen-highways-traffic.html
Also, anyone who has been on the 15 or 215 can tell you that widening only helps push the traffic one direction or another. I have been commuting across town for 15 years and my commute time isn't getting any shorter despite the Billions put in.
Widening doesn't work because no matter how many lanes there are people are afraid to miss an exit or their turn and pack two lanes. Or wait for 5 lanes to clear to merge in the far lane becasue their turn is 3 miles away.
1148 here. Neither of these things are real arguments against widening. The real problem is the never ending battle of balancing traffic management and population growth in our community.
Of course, widening is a temp fix. But, what is the permanent fix? Spend billions or trillions of dollars that will accommodate 4 million people living here? or 5? The argument that a commute hasn't gotten any shorter in 15 years is actually evidence of the solutions working (at least somewhat), especially considering that our population has grown exponentially in the last 40 years.
What we really need is more stadiums.
Of course, any solution that balances the traffic management with population growth is by its very nature, temporary. Until you can come up with a real solution, STFU.
Who the hell appointrd you God of All Conversations on Traffic? Eff you and the horse you rode in on junior.
I guess it takes something less than a God of all Conversations to poke holes in your incessant bitching. Try again or Cry Harder.
Build some light rail.
Great solution and one I totally agree with.
Light rail, yes. Just adding another lane eventually becomes impossible.
It used to take forever to drive from Summerlin to Anthem at any time of day. Now, I can hurtle to Henderson at lightening speeds, as long as it's not rush hour. How is progress bad? How is more people, more lanes, more cars, more prosperity bad?
Love the headline!!
Same. RIP, Sam Harwell.
An important reminder that addiction is deadly.
Are we going to talk about Willick causing a mistrial because of misconduct with jurors in the elevator and hallway?
Wtf!?
What happened? Bench trial in family?
Whoops U said jurors
A-19-792105-B
Any kind summaries for those of us at lunch with our wives listening to pickle ball stories with no time to search for it?
The Court Minutes were posted on yesterday's Blog
At the risk of being thwacked – Willick was sued by a litigant from family court for allegedly improperly filing a lien on a company and/or some property. The matter was set for trial recently and after the jury had been selected, Willick spoke to a juror in the elevator. There is also some reference to conversations in the hallway at court, though it isn't clear what those conversations were about. Allf had to declare a mistrial based on the shenanigans. New trial date is forthcoming. Rumor is that ONJ will be publishing some of the video. ONJ will probably file a media request in the case going forward now which will be fun to watch.
You wont get thwacked because you are summarizing a case involving Willick and not "He Who Shall Not Be Named."
Because we don't talk about Voldemort.
That's why an attorney should immediately leave an elevator if a juror gets in. Basic.
Don’t forget the second he who shall not be named. Starts with a gh … that’s all I can say.
So Doug Ansell (look up his criminal case on Odyssey) is suing Willick who represented his ex wife in family court and who put a list pendens on property. Poor Nancy Allf.
Doesn’t matter what his criminal history is. You can’t lien property just because you feel like it. Also, Doug isn’t the plaintiff.
(1) Not a lien; it was a lis pendens which is stupid when you have a judgment because you can simply record the judgment. But a good primer that judgment liens and lis pendens serve different purposes and not to conflate them. (2) Even the Plaintiff in its Complaint seems to concede that the facial ownership of the Company was not held in Doug Ansell's name but that it was and is an Ansell company (perhaps to shield assets from Willick's client claiming an interest). (3) Anyone who has litigated in or around any of the Ansell cases or has had the pleasure of sitting in a coutroom when one of the Ansell cases comes up for hearing knows what a Smores-y treat dealing with those cases would be.
Doug may not be the plaintiff but Doug owns the company and Doug hired the attorney.
How Mr. Ansell got Steve Peek to take this case is a story I would like to hear about. Also how they planned to have a $10M Blue Heron custom home with strict residential CC&Rs become an "EB-5 Center".
Wasn't the Ansell case the one that Justice Saitta got reprimanded over?
Love the tea. Much appreciated
Yes Ansell was going to establish a commercial enterprise in a purely residential structure. Go figure. Craig Mueller is sometimes his attorney.
Yes Nancy Saitta received public reprimand for not finalizing decree of divorce for 3 years.
@5:04 if you read the complaint you’d know the residential property was an investment to fund the commercial enterprise, not house it.
Ansell was going to sell a spec house to fund his EB-5 center? I thought Ansell made his money selling online corporate kits.
I just beat Ansell and his teams of lawyers in a new state court case. Got out on a 12(b) motion to dismiss. Stupid case. Just got notice he's appealing the dismissal.
@4:49 It looks like Steve Peek is no longer with Holland & Hart. Where did he go?
Steve is still listed on the Court Website for the case but the Bar has him retired.
Steve retired at the end of June
When I think of Peek, he is not just a participant in the legal field but a force of nature, like an elephant in a jungle, dominating with its intellect and energy. While others tiptoe around obstacles, he swings his metaphorical trunk from side to side, toppling barriers as if they were mere blades of grass. If an issue stands in his way? Well, he doesn't just address it; he stomps on it with the decisiveness of an elephant squashing an unfortunate melon. He doesn't navigate the field; he reshapes it, leaving a path so clear, even a marching band could follow. He's not just in the room; he is the room—oh, and he's taken down the walls for good measure!
If it's true he is retired, I wish him well, and hope it's a retirement worthy of a King.
Steve was a big swinging dick, putting all the teeny weenies to shame.
Steve had/has a great voice. That will take you a long way as a trial attorney.
08/24/2023 12:30 PM
– Also present: Karla Vazquez, representative for Plaintiff Haojia LLC OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY Colloquy regarding possible interaction between Defendant and juror. Court canvassed Mr. Willick and Juror # 8 separately regarding interaction in the garage elevator. Mr. Pearson moved to excuse Juror #8. Mr. Wieczorek agreed. COURT ORDERED, juror #8 EXCUSED. Colloquy regarding timing of trial. JURY PRESENT Testimony and exhibits presented. (See worksheets). COURT ORDERED, trial CONTINUED. CONTINUED TO: 8/25/2023 9:30 AM
08/25/2023 9:30 AM
– Also present: Karla Vazquez, representative for Plaintiff Haojia LLC OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY Mr. Pearson moved for mistrial regarding Mr. Willick's communication with a juror. Colloquy regarding conversations made in the hall and whether or not jury members overheard. Mr. Wieczorek noted concerns over a text from Mr. Ansell to Ms. Ansell that was regarding Mr. Willick. Opposition by Mr. Wieczorek to motion for mistrial. Court stated its findings and ORDERED, oral motion for mistrial GRANTED, trial VACATED and RESET to the next stack. JURY PRESENT Testimony and exhibits presented. (See worksheets). Court advised the jury she had declared a mistrial due to misconduct. Court thanked and excused the jury. 9/28/2023 10:30 AM CALENDAR CALL 10/9/2023 9:30 AM JURY TRIAL (STACK)
Is the State Bar website down? I need a copy of the civil government attorneys conference agenda.
It should be in one of the 45 emails you've received on it in the past few months.
Here's tomorrow's agenda:
12:30 – 1:00 PM Registration/Sign-In
1:00 – 1:15 PM Welcome and Introductions
Julie Cavanaugh-Bill, Nevada State Bar President
Sarah A. Bradley, Public Lawyers’ Section Chair
1:15 – 2:15 PM Civility
Kait Flocchini, Esq. (Ethics 1.0)
2:15 – 3:15 PM The Art of Online Legal Research
Ann Walsh Long (Ethics 1.0)
3:15 – 3:30 PM Break
3:30 – 5:00 PM E-Discovery Tips and Tricks
Jon Holpuch (1.50)
5:15 – 6:45 PM Hospitality Suite
Hosted by Steven M. Silva