A local business told company-housed workers to leave, then had to change course. [Fox5Vegas]
In an order filed on April 7, Judge Kerry Earley found that a Plaintiff intentionally caused a mistrial in a medical malpractice case when his counsel injected an allegation of racism. Judge Earley awarded Plaintiff $118K in costs as a result. [Case A-18-776896-C]
The Interim Finance Committee met virtually and approved millions in disbursements for emergency management. [TNI]
Professional gamblers qualify for unemployment during the pandemic. [RJ]
How are your firms handling this crisis from a financial standpoint? Did you have layoffs? Did everyone get a pay cut? Are you renegotiating your lease or loan payments?
This reminds me of the famous adage attributed to Warren Buffett, which I will butcher here: When the water drains out of the pool, you discover who isn't wearing any trunks. Which is to say that this crisis may be exposing the firms that were having some problems or were way overstaffed to begin with. A big ID firm like that isn't going to lay off people on that scale just because of what will likely be one to two rough quarters. There must have been other weaknesses that this has brought to the surface.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 4:59 pm
Small firm. 3 attorneys, 3 staff. No layoffs, yet. If this only goes until around the first of June, I don't anticipate any will be necessary.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 5:14 pm
My firm is supposed to give raises and pay out bonuses next week. So far we haven't heard anything stating they will not be doing this but I remain concerned.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 5:20 pm
Moss Berg cut pay, but giving out campaign contributions. Power over employees.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 6:20 pm
We are lucky. Small firm -attorney, paralegal and receptionist. Had funds aside for "rainy day" – have enough for the rest of the year. Doors are open. One of us is in the office. Paralegal (M, W, F) in am. Receptionist (Tu,Th) in am, with the attorney in the afternoons. We are managing to get all work done, drafted, filed, etc., while keeping the "social distance".
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 6:30 pm
Are you able to EJDC electronically file docs? Sorry, been preoccupied, so I am sure this was discussed already.
Yes, you can electronically file. And chambers are having you email orders for signature.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2020 6:39 pm
Here is a weird question: how do you post TRO/Preliminary Injunction bonds when the Clerks Office is closed? TRO only goes into effect upon the posting of the bond.
After going through 7 different people in different departments, bonds that are to be posted with the Clerk of the Court have to be mailed in and then the Clerk will mail back.
Minutes
12/13/2019 9:00 AM
– This matter came before the Court on Plaintiff s Motion for Mistrial and Fees/Costs, filed on August 4, 2019 by counsel Martin A. Little, Esq. Defendants Opposition to Plaintiff s Motion for Fees/Costs and Defendants Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs Pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070 was filed on August 26, 2019 by counsel S. Brent Vogel, Esq. Defendants Reply in Support of Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs Pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070 was filed September 12, 2019 by counsel S. Brent Vogel, Esq., and Plaintiff s Reply in Support of Motion for Attorneys Fees and Costs was filed September 12, 2019 by counsel James J. Jimmerson, Esq. and Martin A. Little, Esq. Plaintiff s Supplemental Memorandum of Law Regarding McCorkle Treatise was filed on October 1, 2019 by counsel James J. Jimmerson, Esq. and Martin A. Little, Esq. Pursuant to oral argument on the Motion and Countermotion, the Court stated it would issue a decision upon further review of the pleadings and exhibits. Having reviewed the matter, including all points, authorities, transcripts and exhibits, as well as oral argument presented by counsel, the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff s Motion for Mistrial and Fees/Costs pursuant to NRS 18.070(2), as part of the Motion regarding mistrial was previously granted. The only issue before this Court is whether the Court should award attorney s fees and impose costs due to the mistrial. COURT FINDS that the Defendant, pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070(2), purposefully caused the mistrial in this case to occur due to the Defendant knowingly and intentionally injecting into the trial evidence of racism by the use of Exhibit 56, page 44. Defendant s counsel, after examining Mr. Dariyanani regarding the Burning Embers email included in Exhibit 56, specifically asked the witness in follow-up if he thought the comments in the email: You still don t take that as being at all a racist comment? Such evidence of racism was not admissible to prove the Plaintiff s alleged bad character. Further, even though it was admitted without objection, it could only have been used insofar as it did not create plain error. Defendant s counsel is charged with knowing that the injection of such racially inflammatory evidence was improper in the trial. It was reasonably foreseeable to the Defendant that the Court would declare a mistrial due to the Defendant injecting such racially inflammatory evidence. It is discretionary under N.R.S. 18.070(2) as to whether a court imposes costs and reasonable attorney s fees. The Court has determined that the Plaintiff be awarded reasonable and necessarily incurred costs of $118,606.25 pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070(2). The Court further has determined to not award any attorney s fees to Plaintiff. Further, the Court DENIES Defendant s Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs. Counsel for Plaintiff to prepare the Order.
ODYSSEY says that the Plaintiff is "Landess, Jason George Also Known As Landess, Kay George"
Guest
Anonymous
April 10, 2020 2:49 pm
There was no objection,meaning Plaintiff's lawyer didn't see an issue.
Yet, Court finds D's lawyer should have foreseen the problem.
If it's not bad enough for an experienced lawyer to object, it probably is not something Vogel should have foreseen.
This order will–and should–be reversed on appeal.
You can object after the fact and filing the motion itself is an objection.
Guest
Anonymous
April 12, 2020 6:30 pm
Pay cuts across the board… this has to end soon or we're done for.
Guest
Anonymous
September 22, 2021 11:16 pm
On retrial Vogel got a defense verdict. There is justice.
Judge Earley's order awarding costs for mistrial is on appeal via a Writ and the NSC heard oral argument last week. Judge Earley got the case because Judge Bare was disqualified for bias right after the trial based on his statements fawning over Jimmerson (who offered the exhibit at issue without knowing what was in it and stipulated to it's admission) during trial. Yet Bare still signed the order submitted by Jimmerson after the Motion to Disqualify had been filed. Apparently Earley felt she was still bound by that order. Seriously?…SMH
No layoffs. No pay cuts. Solo practitioner that the NSC likes to screw and go after.
Apparently Bremer Whyte laid off a whole bunch of staff and attorneys:
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/04/law-firm-conducts-firmwide-layoffs-furloughs-citing-coronavirus-concerns/
Wow Bremer Whyte got big enough that it is Abovethelaw worthy? Congratulations Peter!
This reminds me of the famous adage attributed to Warren Buffett, which I will butcher here: When the water drains out of the pool, you discover who isn't wearing any trunks. Which is to say that this crisis may be exposing the firms that were having some problems or were way overstaffed to begin with. A big ID firm like that isn't going to lay off people on that scale just because of what will likely be one to two rough quarters. There must have been other weaknesses that this has brought to the surface.
Small firm. 3 attorneys, 3 staff. No layoffs, yet. If this only goes until around the first of June, I don't anticipate any will be necessary.
My firm is supposed to give raises and pay out bonuses next week. So far we haven't heard anything stating they will not be doing this but I remain concerned.
Moss Berg cut pay, but giving out campaign contributions. Power over employees.
We are lucky. Small firm -attorney, paralegal and receptionist. Had funds aside for "rainy day" – have enough for the rest of the year. Doors are open. One of us is in the office. Paralegal (M, W, F) in am. Receptionist (Tu,Th) in am, with the attorney in the afternoons. We are managing to get all work done, drafted, filed, etc., while keeping the "social distance".
Are you able to EJDC electronically file docs? Sorry, been preoccupied, so I am sure this was discussed already.
Yes, you can electronically file. And chambers are having you email orders for signature.
Here is a weird question: how do you post TRO/Preliminary Injunction bonds when the Clerks Office is closed? TRO only goes into effect upon the posting of the bond.
Seek leave to post it in your firm’s trust account pending the end of the world.
After going through 7 different people in different departments, bonds that are to be posted with the Clerk of the Court have to be mailed in and then the Clerk will mail back.
Looks like now the Indy is going to be judging the judges: https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/our-judicial-races-project
Swing high, swing low, make sure you give Elissa Cadish a false postive high rating like in the RJ.
The headline above re Judge Early doesn't quite make sense.
Agreed. I also tried to look up the case no. and nothing popped up…
Minutes
12/13/2019 9:00 AM
– This matter came before the Court on Plaintiff s Motion for Mistrial and Fees/Costs, filed on August 4, 2019 by counsel Martin A. Little, Esq. Defendants Opposition to Plaintiff s Motion for Fees/Costs and Defendants Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs Pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070 was filed on August 26, 2019 by counsel S. Brent Vogel, Esq. Defendants Reply in Support of Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs Pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070 was filed September 12, 2019 by counsel S. Brent Vogel, Esq., and Plaintiff s Reply in Support of Motion for Attorneys Fees and Costs was filed September 12, 2019 by counsel James J. Jimmerson, Esq. and Martin A. Little, Esq. Plaintiff s Supplemental Memorandum of Law Regarding McCorkle Treatise was filed on October 1, 2019 by counsel James J. Jimmerson, Esq. and Martin A. Little, Esq. Pursuant to oral argument on the Motion and Countermotion, the Court stated it would issue a decision upon further review of the pleadings and exhibits. Having reviewed the matter, including all points, authorities, transcripts and exhibits, as well as oral argument presented by counsel, the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff s Motion for Mistrial and Fees/Costs pursuant to NRS 18.070(2), as part of the Motion regarding mistrial was previously granted. The only issue before this Court is whether the Court should award attorney s fees and impose costs due to the mistrial. COURT FINDS that the Defendant, pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070(2), purposefully caused the mistrial in this case to occur due to the Defendant knowingly and intentionally injecting into the trial evidence of racism by the use of Exhibit 56, page 44. Defendant s counsel, after examining Mr. Dariyanani regarding the Burning Embers email included in Exhibit 56, specifically asked the witness in follow-up if he thought the comments in the email: You still don t take that as being at all a racist comment? Such evidence of racism was not admissible to prove the Plaintiff s alleged bad character. Further, even though it was admitted without objection, it could only have been used insofar as it did not create plain error. Defendant s counsel is charged with knowing that the injection of such racially inflammatory evidence was improper in the trial. It was reasonably foreseeable to the Defendant that the Court would declare a mistrial due to the Defendant injecting such racially inflammatory evidence. It is discretionary under N.R.S. 18.070(2) as to whether a court imposes costs and reasonable attorney s fees. The Court has determined that the Plaintiff be awarded reasonable and necessarily incurred costs of $118,606.25 pursuant to N.R.S. 18.070(2). The Court further has determined to not award any attorney s fees to Plaintiff. Further, the Court DENIES Defendant s Countermotion for Attorney s Fees and Costs. Counsel for Plaintiff to prepare the Order.
Yikes.
The Court found that the Defendant intentionally caused the mistrial and awarded costs to the Plaintiff.
The more surprising part of that case is that Jason Landess now refers to himself as "Kay"?
@5:39 where do you see that? Is Landess transitioning?
ODYSSEY says that the Plaintiff is "Landess, Jason George Also Known As Landess, Kay George"
There was no objection,meaning Plaintiff's lawyer didn't see an issue.
Yet, Court finds D's lawyer should have foreseen the problem.
If it's not bad enough for an experienced lawyer to object, it probably is not something Vogel should have foreseen.
This order will–and should–be reversed on appeal.
You can object after the fact and filing the motion itself is an objection.
Pay cuts across the board… this has to end soon or we're done for.
On retrial Vogel got a defense verdict. There is justice.
Judge Earley's order awarding costs for mistrial is on appeal via a Writ and the NSC heard oral argument last week. Judge Earley got the case because Judge Bare was disqualified for bias right after the trial based on his statements fawning over Jimmerson (who offered the exhibit at issue without knowing what was in it and stipulated to it's admission) during trial. Yet Bare still signed the order submitted by Jimmerson after the Motion to Disqualify had been filed. Apparently Earley felt she was still bound by that order. Seriously?…SMH