Peace Cross

  • Law

  • Reminder:  today is the last day to let the Board of Governors know your thoughts about reciprocity by filling out a survey you should have got in your email. 
  • Here’s more on the opioid lawsuit. [Las Vegas Sun]
  • The crackdown on HOV lanes starts today. [LasVegasNow]
  • There were several US Supreme Court decisions today including one that the 40-foot peace cross in Arizona does not violate the Constitution’s establishment clause. [SCOTUSblog]
29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 4:58 pm

Current wrote a critical piece about Herndon, Shirley, and Bill Kephart sending inncocent man to prison. Also, critical of the Bar and Judicial Ethics commission doing shit about it. Sounds spot on.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:01 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Wouldn't there be a statute of limitations issue? I believe there is a SCR that limits bar discipline to 4 years. I have no idea if there is one for the judicial ethics commission.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I am not sure if the Judicial Commission would have jurisdiction for acts of a judicial officer prior to taking the bench.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

There is no statute of limit on voting these jerks out.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

The issues will likely be more relevant with the 2020 election cycle when all of the DJs are up. If I had to guess, the Bar and the Judicial Commission are kicking the can to see if voters resolve the issue (as, clearly, none will step down on principle). Unless some mentioned decide not to run in 2020.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Judicial commission is the biggest joke. Filed a legitimate claim with them and they did crap. Threat to the public. Their office is rude as well.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:28 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Send a letter to Governor Sisolak's office re: staff who were rude (name, date when you called) and that, in your opinion, a legitimate complaint was ignored. Send it certified so you get a receipt and know it was received. The governor's office has oversight for the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Will they actually do something about it? It sucked once that I came forward and they did nothing. Thanks for the advice.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 7:33 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I could not say for certain but the more people who raise an issue about it, the more likely it will get some attention. Some very significant issues have come up which have been ignored or not dealt with (many of which have received public attention in the media) for what appear to be political reasons while the Commission goes after low hanging fruit to support a nearly $1 million dollar per year annual budget.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 7:40 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Indeed, it cannot hurt. I will think about it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:28 pm

HOV = Hell on Vehicles.
I hope the entire city and law enforcement just boycott it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 5:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Saw several people pulled over this morning on the HOV side of the road on the 95 SB. Guessing it was for that.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:17 pm

People with limited means who can't afford registration or insurance are fined $1,000 or more, and then have to drive "illegally."

Summerlin douche bags in their $100,000 cars ride in the HOV lane because they are entitled and they don't give a shit about a $250 fine.

The system is designed to keep less fortunate people down. If these people ever figure it out, pitchforks in the street.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I have long thought fines should be tied to income.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 7:49 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Also designed to encourage people to have insurance to protect the rest of the public who are victims when they are injured by uninsured drivers (who can't afford to pay the medical bills they create).

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 9:42 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Yeah, right on dude – let's stick to the "Man".
While you are at it, let's set bar dues based on income too.
Why stop there? Let's make WalMart set it's prices based on income.
Oh.. be fair, let set YOUR legal fees based on client income.
Rainbows and unicorns for everyone.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 10:33 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

2:42 must live in Summerlin.

Jordan Ross, Principal, Ross Legal Search
Guest
Jordan Ross, Principal, Ross Legal Search
June 21, 2019 6:53 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

June 20, 2019 at 11:44 AM – Obviously a loaded question and implementation would be very complex, but there is merit in the underlying proposition and one worth discussion in the public square. I have long suggested large fines for corporate misbehavior should be based on the untoward profit realized so as to take out the profit from commercial misbehavior and put an end to viewing fines as merely a cost of doing business.

Two related discussions:

1) If stealing a beater car is worth a year in prison, then proportionally there should be Wells Fargo executives serving 47 gazillion year sentences.

2)Criminal prosecution of corporations. Use the guns don't commit crimes, people do argument and apply it to corporations. Yet the guy who boosts a junker worth $2K gets actual time and the corporation who rips off consumers for 100's of millions gets a fine and no one charges any corporate officers or managers. It's been said before, I'll say it again, “I’ll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 21, 2019 9:01 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Some decent points here all around. But let's not lose sight of the fact that OP here glossed over the fact that this injustice all starts with people driving without insurance. There is a damn good public policy reason for requiring insurance. I'm thinking OP would be singing a different tune if a loved one was hit and seriously injured by an uninsured driver.

I also fail to see the correlation between uninsured drivers and douchebags using the HOV lanes. Driving without insurance puts others at serious financial risk if you hit them. Driving in the HOV lane without someone riding shotgun does not put people at serious financial risk or risk of physical harm. It shows entitlement, douchiness, and an overall lack of respect for others and the rules of society, but it does not put others at risk. And no, I don't drive in the HOV lane.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 21, 2019 9:03 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

…nor do I live in Summerlin.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 21, 2019 9:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It's all about money for the leeches in government. The further oppression of the poor is a mere bonus. They profess love for the poor but really despise them. Fight back. Vote Trump 2020!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 21, 2019 11:01 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hear! Hear! I couldn't agree more. Trump loves the poorly educated.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 23, 2019 6:06 am
Reply to  Anonymous

1117 says "Summerlin douche bags in their $100,000 cars ride in the HOV lane because they are entitled and they don't give a shit about a $250 fine."

That is a pretty dumbass argument. HOV violations, last time I checked were "disregard of a traffic control device" same as running a red light. That is 4 points and not just a $250.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 24, 2019 6:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

HOV violations are specifically addressed under NRS 484B.323. I suppose a cop can be a dick about it and write it under 484B.300, but I would say that's less common. 

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:18 pm

Seeking advice from my more practiced colleagues. I'm a relatively new associate at a firm (practicing under 5 years). I've got a personal referral for a client I'd like to bring in. Nothing major, but I'm hoping to bring in more business when I can. Should I negotiate a percentage of the new business? If so, how do I have that conversation? Any advice on what to say or look out for would be appreciated.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Depends on the firm and policies. Some firms have a set rate that an originator gets–some might give you a small percentage as finder, it really just depends on what they do. If it's a small firm with no set polices, yes, negotiate it. Just ask and get everything in writing before your client signs the engagement letter.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 6:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Probably depends on whether the referral is a one-off or will be a continuing source of fee-generating work. If the former, sign up the client and let the partners decide what to to. If the latter, have a meeting with your supervising partner to discuss.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 20, 2019 10:16 pm

Lesson here is do not hire paralegals. Do not hire billboard lawyers.
Thank you!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
June 21, 2019 7:09 pm

Some of my most memorably negative interactions as a lawyer have been with paralegals.