A woman claims mistreatment in the CCDC. [LasVegasNow]
The DA’s office wants your help finding a woman who forged checks and signed up her own clients at a law firm and managed to take $700,000 in the process. Anyone know what firm she was at? [KTNV]
The State will pay a $750,000 settlement to family of a veteran who died of legionella in the Nevada State Veterans Home. [TNI]
LACSN is first and foremost a fundraising organization. What a joke of a "law firm."
Guest
Lawyer Bird
September 14, 2017 3:42 pm
These attorneys should be disbarred.
"She would work the entire case all the way through settlement," Wolfson explained. "The settlement check would come in and the lawyers didn't even know that she had signed up clients and then stole the money."
Yeah, that seems pretty crazy, although I think it depends on what lengths she went to to hide her actions. I'm not always at my office so my paralegal could probably meet with clients without my knowledge if she scheduled the meetings during those times.
At least the DA is doing something about it. I know of 2 firms who had the same woman embezzle money many years ago. The 1st one she used the credit cards and forged checks from the estates they were handling. DA refused to prosecute and said it was a civil matter. They had to settle on a Confession of Judgment for $25,000.00. The 2nd firm she used checks from the back of the account and forged lines of credit to the tune of $60,000+. Again, the DA refused to prosecute and said it was a civil matter. I say bravo Wolfson.
You don't have more than one employee? You haven't divided up the powers and responsibilities such that 1 person, other than you, has access to all aspects of the firm finances and operations? Incoming mail, funds, etc should be handled by a different person that has the ability to issue outgoing disbursements. Similarly, maintaining of the client file should be handled by someone different than the person working on the file.
By diffusing the responsibilities, it substantially reduces the chance of events like this from occurring.
Normally they say "Well you shouldn't have hired her. Its a civil matter to get the money back." The attorney scrounges up the monies to pay the clients and then chases the employee. Well after Graham, this is $700,000 of client monies. Luis is never going to be able to pay that back, especially since his ability to get back into practice is now derailed. So DA is not doing this to help the firm but to help the clients (as it should be).
@12:07– How would he have divided responsibilities when he only had one employee? There was no one to divide it between. One employee. She was it. And in his absence he relied upon her. Dumb and way too trusting.
@12:07: With only the one employee a couple of easy things that he could have done is to maintain control of access to the mails (unless located in a free standing building most locations have gang box for mail delivery, collect all mail himself prior to handing over to the assistant for processing) and certainly keep control over all aspects of the firm banking and financials. Not only should there not have been any signature stamps or electronic signature devices, he should have had the only access to banking forms (deposit slips, checks, statements, etc.) If the criminal employee can't access those items, its very difficult, if not impossible, for this type of crime to occur.
Guest
Anonymous
September 14, 2017 3:54 pm
The NSC certainly takes its precious time to produce opinions. I don't know why they even advertise that there is an expedited fast track process for child custody, because they are taking as long as full briefing.
There is a case that a litigant filed a Motion for Order Expediting Processing in April which was granted. It took the Court until September to consider it.
Am I reading the DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES right? It seems to say that if I setup an IP based phone system in California (which only requires one party consent to record phone calls), even if both sides of the phone call are in Nevada, that because the actual audio intercept and recording occurred in California, that it would be legal for me to do so without informing the other party (in Nevada as well) that I am recording them?
Here is the Civil Case in case you were interested. Luis got suspended. He had Gray manage the law firm. She continued to sign up clients and take the money during the suspension. According to the civil complaint it was her and her entire family. If I knew how to use DocStoc or Scribd I would post the Complaint.
Yes. Luis was suspended for 18 months back to May 2015 related to his home loan and could have applied for reinstatement by now. He cannot apply for reinstatement while $700,000 is missing from the law firm that continued to have his name on it.
Luis is still a good guy. Yes, he did not tell the truth on a loan application (which unfortunately he and half the population did). That is why the Feds gave him probation. That is why the State Bar gave him only 18 months. Following the pleadings, it looks like he trusted the wrong office manager. We all rely on our staff.
Doesn't sound like he was practicing law. Sounds like non-lawyer staff was using his letterhead and forms and was doing stuff without his knowledge. Phone calls forwarded to her cell phone. Sounds like she ran the entire thing without depositing monies anywhere that Luis would have seen it. And candidly, with the other issues he was dealing with, he probably was not monitoring every letter that went out the door and every check that came in.
11:45 here– Let me add one caveat. To the extent that the Complaint alleges that she was cutting checks out of the Trust Account starting in 2012, yeah Luis is responsible for the Trust Account actually set up by the firm. To the extent that she had an "electronic signature" (who allows ANYONE to have an electronic signature for IOLTA Account checks) Luis is civilly responsible for those monies and should have been checking to make sure that the account balanced. But I have not seen anything alleging that he was continuing practice law or do anything other than wind down after May 1, 2015.
3:20–They did suspend him. Disbarment is not only not appropriate on the short sale case but is violation of the ABA Standards for Attorney Discipline. Yeah his disciplinary case was handled by the book. I know the OBC does not get a lot of love on this page (rightfully so). But Rojas's case was handled just fine.
I would tell you to have a little "There but for the grace" humility but I suspect 3:20 you are not an attorney so you don't have that degree of foresight.
It never ceases to amaze me all the people that try to justify committing loan fraud under the "everyone was doing it" banner. No one holds a gun to the head of the borrower when they sign the loan application, under penalty of perjury knowing that the information contained therein is false. Last time I looked (admittedly a very long time ago) fraud was a crime of moral turpitude.
I don't see anyone justifying it. You are right– it is a felony. As is fudging on your taxes. As are a number of things. Doesn't matter if they should be. Doesn't matter if they cherry-pick yours out as the one they go after and let everyone else go. But Rojas paid the penalty both on the Federal and bar levels. That does not minimize it. It just says "OK that's enough."
"I would tell you to have a little "There but for the grace" humility but I suspect 3:20 you are not an attorney so you don't have that degree of foresight."
Because yeah, "there but for the grace" humility is a highly common trait among lawyers.
Guest
Anonymous
September 14, 2017 5:17 pm
Late jury verdict gossip…jury returned a total defense verdict in a brain injury case after a 5+ week trial. Jury out for less than an hour. Plaintiffs boarded over $5M in damages and asked for $28M. Defense firm was Olson Cannon.
As a plaintiff's lawyer, I've probably had about four cases over the years that I thought had legitimate multi-million dollar potential. I've settled every one of them somewhere in the $1-2.5 million range. At times I've had an unhappy client who felt he or she was sold short, or I've gone around kicking myself and feeling like I wimped out. But damn, you never know what a jury is going to do, and the enormity of a loss like this must be staggering. Of course, I have no idea what the offers and demands were here.
I've always wondered if brain injury cases are harder to win at trial when the injury may not always be as visible as say, an amputation or other type of horrible disfigurement case. I don't know any of the facts of the case we're discussing so it might not be the situation there, but I've seen a few "brain injury" cases where the victim still seemed to be pretty normal in spit of what he was claiming to be serious issues.
I was still working on the plaintiffs' side a few years ago when some outside companies started coming in and giving presentations regarding "mild" TBI. They pitched a whole slew of damages based on some symptoms that seemed pretty inconsequential to me — headaches and a little memory loss, for example. I left that practice soon after, but I wouldn't be surprised if a quite a few plaintiffs now allege these injuries.
2:33…it depends on the degree of the brain injury. Mild/Moderate/Severe. The case discussed above appears to have been a mild TBI from the briefs, though it seems P was claiming it was a moderate TBI. It also appears the P was determined to be totally and permanently disabled as a result of the TBI.
From an injury standpoint this sounds not unlike the case against Lowe's wherein Sean Claggett knocked one out of the park a year or so ago. Maybe they should have hired Sean Claggett. I am not Sean Claggett.
Wasn't the Paul Padda case involving Marquee Nite Club a closed head injury or traumatic brain injury case? That was one of the largest plaintiff verdicts in history. Settled for 8 or 9 figures was the word.
From the court docket, it seems workers compensation as the exclusive remedy was an issue and that the case started with multiple defendants but by the time of trial it was down to 1 defendant left standing (settlements and/or summary judgment). It's possible that the explanation for a defense verdict lies in the jury believing it was the wrong defendant before them or determining that the exclusive remedy was workers comp.
I waited a few days to post this to help conceal my identity but WTH is going on with Joe Hardy? From relatively mild-mannered to just becoming a monster on the Bench. Noticing eerie similarities to Scotti–relatively nice guys that have just been losing it lately on the bench. Ridiculous rulings, uncontrollable losses of temper which bleed over to matters 5 after Hardy has lost his mind.
Guest
Anonymous
September 14, 2017 6:36 pm
Hardy is awesome! He is making the defense pigs SQUEAL!!
Hardy has turned into a complete dbag on the bench. I knew him in private practice and he seemed like a nice enough vanilla LDS guy. Living off his family name but whatever. He has basically become a nasty Jessie Walsh. Yeah his rulings are really Plaintiff oriented on the PI stuff. But I do Business Court cases, which he has just become an a-hole.
Like every other judge in town, who also know where their campaign contributions come from. Judge Hardy used to be a insurance defense lawyer, but you can't blame him for reading the writing on the wall and subconsciously giving the plaintiffs' bar a little sugar. Until the defense bar/carriers get their act together and contribute to campaigns in like manner, this will continue to happen.
I heard that with Judges Scotti and Hardy, large green seed pods were placed next to their beds while they slept–absorbing all their thoughts and memories during the night. When they awoke, their original forms were gone, and the sea-pods had transformed into the new Judges Scotti and Hardy. Identical in all regards to the earlier ones, but now with a decidedly different, and less sympathetic personality.
It will eventually happen to even the most mild-mannered judges.
Heed the warning of the seemingly crazed man running through traffic yelling "They're here! Listen you fools! They are coming for you next!"
We will know my sea-pod theory is accurate if the most kind, even-tempered judges–like Denton, Duckworth,etc.—suddenly become short-tempered and nasty.
Call me insane at your own peril. You may be next.
Before I embrace 1:35's sea-pod theory, I submit the cause is something a lot more basic and within the realm of current human knowledge and understanding.
They simply have a very early, and seemingly extreme, case of robeitis, or, in more common parlance, black robe fever.
All the judges do. Barker did not. Denton did not, although I have not been in front of him in awhile. Bonnie is not a judge, but she has the robe syndrome big time.
Guest
Anonymous
September 14, 2017 10:44 pm
I don't know William Datthyn, but I have gone tubing on that section of the Bear River in Franklin County, Idaho many, many times. A real tragedy because it's a fairly safe, lazy, and fun river to go tubing on. RIP.
Guest
Anonymous
September 15, 2017 1:09 am
Is it for real NSC released advance opinions today…
LACSN is first and foremost a fundraising organization. What a joke of a "law firm."
These attorneys should be disbarred.
"She would work the entire case all the way through settlement," Wolfson explained. "The settlement check would come in and the lawyers didn't even know that she had signed up clients and then stole the money."
Yeah, that seems pretty crazy, although I think it depends on what lengths she went to to hide her actions. I'm not always at my office so my paralegal could probably meet with clients without my knowledge if she scheduled the meetings during those times.
At least the DA is doing something about it. I know of 2 firms who had the same woman embezzle money many years ago. The 1st one she used the credit cards and forged checks from the estates they were handling. DA refused to prosecute and said it was a civil matter. They had to settle on a Confession of Judgment for $25,000.00. The 2nd firm she used checks from the back of the account and forged lines of credit to the tune of $60,000+. Again, the DA refused to prosecute and said it was a civil matter. I say bravo Wolfson.
You don't have more than one employee? You haven't divided up the powers and responsibilities such that 1 person, other than you, has access to all aspects of the firm finances and operations? Incoming mail, funds, etc should be handled by a different person that has the ability to issue outgoing disbursements. Similarly, maintaining of the client file should be handled by someone different than the person working on the file.
By diffusing the responsibilities, it substantially reduces the chance of events like this from occurring.
Normally they say "Well you shouldn't have hired her. Its a civil matter to get the money back." The attorney scrounges up the monies to pay the clients and then chases the employee. Well after Graham, this is $700,000 of client monies. Luis is never going to be able to pay that back, especially since his ability to get back into practice is now derailed. So DA is not doing this to help the firm but to help the clients (as it should be).
@12:07– How would he have divided responsibilities when he only had one employee? There was no one to divide it between. One employee. She was it. And in his absence he relied upon her. Dumb and way too trusting.
@12:07: With only the one employee a couple of easy things that he could have done is to maintain control of access to the mails (unless located in a free standing building most locations have gang box for mail delivery, collect all mail himself prior to handing over to the assistant for processing) and certainly keep control over all aspects of the firm banking and financials. Not only should there not have been any signature stamps or electronic signature devices, he should have had the only access to banking forms (deposit slips, checks, statements, etc.) If the criminal employee can't access those items, its very difficult, if not impossible, for this type of crime to occur.
The NSC certainly takes its precious time to produce opinions. I don't know why they even advertise that there is an expedited fast track process for child custody, because they are taking as long as full briefing.
There is a case that a litigant filed a Motion for Order Expediting Processing in April which was granted. It took the Court until September to consider it.
The Forthcoming Opinions page says nothing. The Unpublished Orders page is broken. http://nvcourts.gov/notfound.aspx?aspxerrorpath=/Supreme/Decisions/Unpublished_Orders/
They published 9 opinions today.
That took all day. Nothing was out as of middle of the afternoon.
Am I reading the DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES right? It seems to say that if I setup an IP based phone system in California (which only requires one party consent to record phone calls), even if both sides of the phone call are in Nevada, that because the actual audio intercept and recording occurred in California, that it would be legal for me to do so without informing the other party (in Nevada as well) that I am recording them?
11:25,
That was my immediate thinking, too.
11:25– You are reading that absolutely correct.
The firm where the checks were stolen is Stein & Rojas but was exclusively on the Rojas side.
Here is the Civil Case in case you were interested. Luis got suspended. He had Gray manage the law firm. She continued to sign up clients and take the money during the suspension. According to the civil complaint it was her and her entire family. If I knew how to use DocStoc or Scribd I would post the Complaint.
https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Anonymous/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=11758504
The same Rojas that was suspended for 18 months, retroactive to May 2015?
http://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseView.do?csIID=38001
Yes. Luis was suspended for 18 months back to May 2015 related to his home loan and could have applied for reinstatement by now. He cannot apply for reinstatement while $700,000 is missing from the law firm that continued to have his name on it.
My God, Luis – you were once a good guy. What the hell happened to you? Now you'll never get your license back.
Luis is still a good guy. Yes, he did not tell the truth on a loan application (which unfortunately he and half the population did). That is why the Feds gave him probation. That is why the State Bar gave him only 18 months. Following the pleadings, it looks like he trusted the wrong office manager. We all rely on our staff.
Um, while you're suspended you're not supposed to practice law through your non-lawyer staff.
Doesn't sound like he was practicing law. Sounds like non-lawyer staff was using his letterhead and forms and was doing stuff without his knowledge. Phone calls forwarded to her cell phone. Sounds like she ran the entire thing without depositing monies anywhere that Luis would have seen it. And candidly, with the other issues he was dealing with, he probably was not monitoring every letter that went out the door and every check that came in.
11:45 here– Let me add one caveat. To the extent that the Complaint alleges that she was cutting checks out of the Trust Account starting in 2012, yeah Luis is responsible for the Trust Account actually set up by the firm. To the extent that she had an "electronic signature" (who allows ANYONE to have an electronic signature for IOLTA Account checks) Luis is civilly responsible for those monies and should have been checking to make sure that the account balanced. But I have not seen anything alleging that he was continuing practice law or do anything other than wind down after May 1, 2015.
Isn't amazing that once somebody gets in trouble–more trouble surrounds them. It never seems to fail. Sorry, but they just need to suspend/disbar these folks the first time around. It has to be done to save future harm. https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/henderson-lawyer-luis-j-rojas-gets-probation-in-short-sale-scheme/
3:20–They did suspend him. Disbarment is not only not appropriate on the short sale case but is violation of the ABA Standards for Attorney Discipline. Yeah his disciplinary case was handled by the book. I know the OBC does not get a lot of love on this page (rightfully so). But Rojas's case was handled just fine.
I would tell you to have a little "There but for the grace" humility but I suspect 3:20 you are not an attorney so you don't have that degree of foresight.
It never ceases to amaze me all the people that try to justify committing loan fraud under the "everyone was doing it" banner. No one holds a gun to the head of the borrower when they sign the loan application, under penalty of perjury knowing that the information contained therein is false. Last time I looked (admittedly a very long time ago) fraud was a crime of moral turpitude.
I don't see anyone justifying it. You are right– it is a felony. As is fudging on your taxes. As are a number of things. Doesn't matter if they should be. Doesn't matter if they cherry-pick yours out as the one they go after and let everyone else go. But Rojas paid the penalty both on the Federal and bar levels. That does not minimize it. It just says "OK that's enough."
"I would tell you to have a little "There but for the grace" humility but I suspect 3:20 you are not an attorney so you don't have that degree of foresight."
Because yeah, "there but for the grace" humility is a highly common trait among lawyers.
Late jury verdict gossip…jury returned a total defense verdict in a brain injury case after a 5+ week trial. Jury out for less than an hour. Plaintiffs boarded over $5M in damages and asked for $28M. Defense firm was Olson Cannon.
Who had the Plaintiff's side?
Was this Bill Palmer's case? For the Plaintiff's side?
Liability dispute then? Would be good to hear some factual background from someone in the know.
As a plaintiff's lawyer, I've probably had about four cases over the years that I thought had legitimate multi-million dollar potential. I've settled every one of them somewhere in the $1-2.5 million range. At times I've had an unhappy client who felt he or she was sold short, or I've gone around kicking myself and feeling like I wimped out. But damn, you never know what a jury is going to do, and the enormity of a loss like this must be staggering. Of course, I have no idea what the offers and demands were here.
A-11-635644-C
Max Corrick is a top notch lawyer and, in my experience with him, also is reasonable and professional to deal with as opposing counsel.
I've always wondered if brain injury cases are harder to win at trial when the injury may not always be as visible as say, an amputation or other type of horrible disfigurement case. I don't know any of the facts of the case we're discussing so it might not be the situation there, but I've seen a few "brain injury" cases where the victim still seemed to be pretty normal in spit of what he was claiming to be serious issues.
I was still working on the plaintiffs' side a few years ago when some outside companies started coming in and giving presentations regarding "mild" TBI. They pitched a whole slew of damages based on some symptoms that seemed pretty inconsequential to me — headaches and a little memory loss, for example. I left that practice soon after, but I wouldn't be surprised if a quite a few plaintiffs now allege these injuries.
2:33…it depends on the degree of the brain injury. Mild/Moderate/Severe. The case discussed above appears to have been a mild TBI from the briefs, though it seems P was claiming it was a moderate TBI. It also appears the P was determined to be totally and permanently disabled as a result of the TBI.
From an injury standpoint this sounds not unlike the case against Lowe's wherein Sean Claggett knocked one out of the park a year or so ago. Maybe they should have hired Sean Claggett. I am not Sean Claggett.
Or maybe Lowe's should have hired Olson Cannon…
Wasn't the Paul Padda case involving Marquee Nite Club a closed head injury or traumatic brain injury case? That was one of the largest plaintiff verdicts in history. Settled for 8 or 9 figures was the word.
Thank you, claggett.
So who was plaintiffs counsel that got defensed.
Palmer. Its a BOWLING case asking for $25MM. No wonder the jury didn't award damages. Who pays damages in a bowling case?
It was a guy falling off a ladder case and bouncing his head off the concrete case. Against the United States bowling congress.
From the court docket, it seems workers compensation as the exclusive remedy was an issue and that the case started with multiple defendants but by the time of trial it was down to 1 defendant left standing (settlements and/or summary judgment). It's possible that the explanation for a defense verdict lies in the jury believing it was the wrong defendant before them or determining that the exclusive remedy was workers comp.
Workers comp didnt go to the jury. Wrong party not an issue. It was a liability and damages case
Only one defendant.
I waited a few days to post this to help conceal my identity but WTH is going on with Joe Hardy? From relatively mild-mannered to just becoming a monster on the Bench. Noticing eerie similarities to Scotti–relatively nice guys that have just been losing it lately on the bench. Ridiculous rulings, uncontrollable losses of temper which bleed over to matters 5 after Hardy has lost his mind.
Hardy is awesome! He is making the defense pigs SQUEAL!!
Hardy has turned into a complete dbag on the bench. I knew him in private practice and he seemed like a nice enough vanilla LDS guy. Living off his family name but whatever. He has basically become a nasty Jessie Walsh. Yeah his rulings are really Plaintiff oriented on the PI stuff. But I do Business Court cases, which he has just become an a-hole.
Like every other judge in town, who also know where their campaign contributions come from. Judge Hardy used to be a insurance defense lawyer, but you can't blame him for reading the writing on the wall and subconsciously giving the plaintiffs' bar a little sugar. Until the defense bar/carriers get their act together and contribute to campaigns in like manner, this will continue to happen.
I heard that with Judges Scotti and Hardy, large green seed pods were placed next to their beds while they slept–absorbing all their thoughts and memories during the night. When they awoke, their original forms were gone, and the sea-pods had transformed into the new Judges Scotti and Hardy. Identical in all regards to the earlier ones, but now with a decidedly different, and less sympathetic personality.
It will eventually happen to even the most mild-mannered judges.
Heed the warning of the seemingly crazed man running through traffic yelling "They're here! Listen you fools! They are coming for you next!"
We will know my sea-pod theory is accurate if the most kind, even-tempered judges–like Denton, Duckworth,etc.—suddenly become short-tempered and nasty.
Call me insane at your own peril. You may be next.
Always go for the simplest explanation.
Before I embrace 1:35's sea-pod theory, I submit the cause is something a lot more basic and within the realm of current human knowledge and understanding.
They simply have a very early, and seemingly extreme, case of robeitis, or, in more common parlance, black robe fever.
All the judges do. Barker did not. Denton did not, although I have not been in front of him in awhile. Bonnie is not a judge, but she has the robe syndrome big time.
I don't know William Datthyn, but I have gone tubing on that section of the Bear River in Franklin County, Idaho many, many times. A real tragedy because it's a fairly safe, lazy, and fun river to go tubing on. RIP.
Is it for real NSC released advance opinions today…
A whole bunch
Let's try spreading some love and positively on here for a change.
Could not agree with you more. Once again, it is your Blog. However that standard of positivity so long as that standard is applied across the board.
Lawyers aren't capable of being positive. We're bitter and angry all the time. Miserable, too.