- Quickdraw McLaw
- 54 Comments
- 193 Views
- There are a number of attorneys (and Boyd grads) on this 40 under 40 list. [Vegas Inc]
- President Trump’s lead lawyer on the Russian investigation has resigned. [Fox5Vegas]
- Anything else going on out there today?
Rained On
- Law
- Posted on 7 years ago
Elana Graham one of them? The "Boyd Alum" party. Not sure how she is getting away with this. Anybody know how the hell to get off of Dave Thomas' email list? This is the second notice I have received in two days.
You can reply requesting removal.
Also, I think you are reading the flyer incorrectly. Boyd Alumni Association is not hosting the event. All of the hosts are Boyd Alumni.
Thank you 9:52. I was wondering why I hadn't seen an invite or anything from the alumni association.
9:40, you should read more carefully.
Ginn has my vote. I see any affiliation with Dave Thomas, you lose my support.
Ditto anyone using (or related to) Letizia.
Who are Letizia's clients?
Mary Kay Holthus, justice has a name….Elissa Cadish
Using "Boyd Alumni" and friends is a cheap attempt to imply affiliation with or endorsement by Boyd Alumni Association. That, and the fact these e-mail blasts don't have an "unsubscribe" link, guarantee I will be voting for whomever is running against Ms. Graham
She is running against two people: James Dean Leavitt and Vinny Ginn. I recommend you vote for Ginn.
I vote for Trevor Hayes or Sean Claggett. Where's the button?
Ginn because he isn't using any slime ball campaign reps (that's you Thomas and Letizia). Boyd states it will be sending something out on the alumni list serve today about Elana Graham and her use of the Alumni Association.
It went out on the list serve, no way!!!!!
People are assuming that because Vinnie Ginn, and others, are not using Dave Thomas(and/or Letizia) that Ginn and others should be supported because this must mean they are highly principled.
That could be true. I don't know. But I bet the reason they are not using campaign managers is not on account of such candidates having a strict personal code of campaign ethics, but instead these candidates are not employing the campaign managers because they simply cannot afford them.
Vinnie Ginn runs repeatedly and (apparently) badly wants to be a judge. If he hired Thomas, he could immediately expect multiple critical endorsements, such as trade unions, critical law enforcement endorsements, etc.
I bet he would love to have such support, so we should not assume that every candidate who declines to hire a campaign manager declines to do so merely because they are highly principled. Usually, they simply can't afford to hire a manger.
After all, if this is a principled stance, and Ginn and others object to Thomas and Letizia based on how some perceive them, the candidates could always hire some manager with a good track record but with no serious perceived baggage.
Perhaps the best way to get to the bottom of this is to open a direct dialogue with the candidates. Vinnie Ginn can certainly address it as to why he is not using a manager in general, and why he is not using Thomas in particular.Perhaps the decision is not financial, and it is principled. Who knows. I'm sure these candidates are happy to address this.
Thank you, 225. I am still avoiding Letizia and Thomas. Ginn does not run all the time.
Vinny DOES run all the time. He's run in the last three JP races. He's run against Lippis, Bennet-Haren, and now in this race. He does not have a campaign manager because he can't afford one. Ask criminal practitioners who they would vote for and I'm guessing the majority would go with Ms. Graham. I am a criminal defense attorney, I know all three candidates pretty well, did NOT go to Boyd, I'd vote for Elana, she is the best qualified of the three.
Stop with the CAPs.
301 is Letizia.
Isn't Letizia representing Leavitt? Why would Leavitt's campaign manager be on here endorsing his opponent?
I just want know who wears the pjs to court?
Is Pa Graham cooking up the vittles today?
Graham had her party at the Firefly. They poisoned over 100 people there. She has my vote.
Long time criminal defense practitioner here-my vote is with Graham
I am a judicial law clerk who is not supporting Graham
Two months for court minutes that are non-descriptive. Way to go!
Whose department is that? That is a joke.
I don't know, but I just picked up a FFCL from Cadish's chambers that only took 4.5 months to sign. WTF?
Is Elissa Cadish out of town again campaigning this week?
Yes. Oh, shit!
Are you okay?
Here is a joke: Motio nin JC 6 (yes that is you Rebecca Kern). Motion filed with Application for OST end of January. Just got the OST returned setting the matter "on OST" for the end of April. That pretty much just destroyed any efforts at shortening time and is a department in shambles.
Kern is in over her my name sounds like Cedric Kearns head.
Kern was out on maternity leave last time I was in her courtroom. That might have something to do with it.
This is correct. Kern recently returned and is likely buried in paperwork.
Holly Stoberski handled that department while Kern was out.
Well I did not get to elect Holly Stoberski so three (3) months to sign an OST and have an Unlawful Detainer hearing which statute can be heard on expedited basis is ridiculous. Guess who I hold responsible postpartum? Kern and her staff, baby or no baby.
As far as the Top 40 under 40,as to this year's list, I never heard of anyone on the list.
My experience , after viewing these lists for the past 30 or 35 years, is that these lists seldom includes any of the best lawyers under 40, but instead tend to include the most self-aggrandizing, self-promoting, visibility obsessed, lime-light seeking attorneys under 40
Me either.
That's funny, I've heard of several of them (and I'm not even self-aggrandizing, self-promoting, visibility obsessed, lime-light seeking).
You must be over 40.
Stormy weather!
Yes, bc there is a huge difference bn 39 and 40.
You know, I'm a little sad because I'm turning 40 this year and never made it on any of these lists. I should make my own list… Top 40 lawyers under 40 who are underpaid, underappreciated, and overworked.
Dammit, I probably wouldn't that one either.
4:07—are you me?
1:42 sounds a bit envious but, based on history, I believe the remarks by 1:42 are, at least to a significant extent, quite valid
Perhaps that makes me envious as well, but I agree with the observation.
When I have known people on this list, it was never some really hard-working person who did not have much interest in public attention. It was always someone who spent much more time socializing and hobb knobbing with the perceived elite, and engaging in attention-seeking self-promotion, than they spent performing actual law work.
Did you ever know anyone reasonably humble and well-centered who ever made this list? Those I knew who made it were always shameless narcissists. But others probably have different experiences and know worthy, deserving people who made the list.
So I just got back from family court – my order was rejected bc the title was not in 14pt (it was in 12pt) – is this normal down there? I'm not kidding, the attached letter only refers to that and in other respects the format looks great – I almost thought it was some sort of joke that got through the process. Is there a rule about 14 pt? I guess I'll go look it up since it seems to be so important – not looking forward to going back there.
Are you sure Bonnie Bulls isn't the one issuing the letter?
@1:54pm. Was the clerk's office or the department itself that rejected your order? The EDCR 5's were revised recently and the 14 pt. font applies to motions and oppositions (see EDCR 5.503) but to date I have submitted and filed orders still in 12pt. font with no issue.
wow – it was the Department – thank you – guess I gotta keep up on this – I'll check out the EDCR – appreciate your thoughts – thanks
I shouldn't have assumed they were being incorrectly picky – my bad
14 point font for everything except footnotes? What kind of Mickey Mouse Reader's Digest Large Print Edition for the Blind horseshit is that?
That is news to me. 14 point for everything, no shit?
That's what the new EDCR 5.503 says. Proportional font is required to be 14 or larger, just like you see in all the magazines, newspapers, books.. wait, that's not right. People who make a living getting people to read never make their font that big. The bench must have some secret knowledge that's never been uncovered by the printing world. Yeah, that's what it must be…
Nevada Supreme Court requires 14 point type on the your briefs that they never read and just rule on based on "feel".
why aren't the new rules updated here?
https://www.leg.state.nv.us/CourtRules/EighthDCR.html
Because it always takes a long time for the Legislature's law library to be updated. The new EDCR rules were made under ADKT 0512, effective January 28, 2017.
Same reason that when you go to leg.nv.us, the 2017 Amendments to the NRS are not in there so our official Law Library does not contain the current laws of the state.