A lot of attorneys also use Nevada State Bank. However, I have always had excellent luck at Bank of America and Well Fargo. Their small business bankers are the best in the business.
1135am here.
I used Wells from 2002, when I went solo to about 2005 when the BofA was just more convenient. Used BofA until 2014, with never a hiccup. Returned to Wells in 2019 and have never looked back.
I am not sure what bad experiences you have had (not doubting them), but for this guy, both have been very good to me and never a glitch or dispute in well over 20 years.
Wells Fargo has admitted to opening fake accounts to steal millions of dollars from its customers, illegally repossessing service members’ cars, and fraudulently placing unnecessary insurance to steal from auto loan borrowers. That list doesn’t include all the credible allegations they bank denies. I get that it’s a hassle to switch bank accounts but it boggles my mind that any new customer would choose a bank that steals from you when there are so many other options.
We use G Bank for operating and IOLTA and also have an IOLTA at B of A. G Bank is way, way more personal. We have a specific person that knows us and is easy to communicate with about any questions or issues. With BofA, there are different people almost every time I need something.
Even though banks today are notorious for being impersonal institutions, it still helps if you make sure the branch manager knows who you are. If you are dealing with WF or BofA, find a smaller and less busy branch, not one that looks like the waiting room at a bus station when you walk in. Things will go more smoothly and they will be less inclined to look at you like you’re a drug dealer/fraudster/international terrorist when you come in with a big check, particularly if you are using a POA to deposit checks made payable to both you and the client. Sounds 1950’s quaint, but I think it helped me quite a bit when I first opened my own practice. Prior to that, I had the experience of a teller not even knowing what an IOLTA was, or refusing to accept a POA without “running it by the home office first,” etc. Personal relationships still matter.
Guest
Anonymous
August 2, 2024 10:43 am
I went and saw Ozzie once. It was cool to see him and feed him, but it was super sad that he was stuck in Henderson with a bunch of lions. I hope they don’t try to replace him with another.
I’ve noticed that too. TBH I actually don’t mind it as much now. Pre-2020 it was no bueno and while that dept still has issues, it’s no where near as bad as it was.
Guest
Robert
August 2, 2024 1:00 pm
As a canon lawyer and civil attorney, canon law absolutely needs Latin (Latin remains the official language), civil law, it is nice to have Latin usage, but certainly not necessary.
Canon Law is very interesting. There are a few canon lawyers in town. Catholicism isn’t the only religion that has (or had) an ecclesiastical structure to adjudicate civil disputes. Judaism still does. Mormonism used to. There are others.
In August 2021, FedEx misdelivered a package with $291.48 worth of supplements to your residence occupied by you and your husband, despite the package being properly labeled for your adjoining neighbor’s residence. After your efforts to return the package to your neighbors were rejected, you ultimately shipped the package back to the sender. In the meantime, your neighbors filed a report with the local police. Your neighbors were reimbursed for the package cost. However, your role in the mishandling of their package resulted in your neighbor’s filing a report with local law enforcement and with the State Bar of Nevada (“State Bar”).
WAIT, she tried to return the package to her neighbor who refused it, so she mailed the package back? What exactly did she do wrong? This is absolutely absurd.
This is wrong. The discipline panel stated “After your efforts to return the package to your neighbors were rejected…”
There were no other facts given, but if she tried to return and the neighbor rebuffed, then what was she supposed to do? Shipping it back is what I would have done.
The problem is that the Henderson JP found her guilty. Based on what’s said in the Committee report, it is hard to fathom the logic of JP: no damages, packaged delivered to her through no fault of her own, reasonable efforts to correct by returning, and then shipping it back when the neighbor refused.
That said, the conviction is the cause for the reprimand. But on these facts, OBC should have declined to consider it. Appears over zealous.
holy cow. if this is representative of what the OBC is doing, then I get why there are so many complaints on here. Either we are missing some details about how she got convicted or this is really messed up.
Yeah – the underlying conviction was not warranted or justified. But based on the conviction, that’s the ball game. It should have been a private reprimand, but that is not an option.
This is disgusting. I’d love to know who the neighbor knows in HPD. OBC is out of control. I’m genuinely making plans to leave this state and OBC is part of that decision. Practicing here has become an exercise in misery.
Signed by Jay Shafer, who took in Chris Reade as his paralegal and then as his partner after Reade got his license back (which I presume Shafer helped Reade with).
Yeah, after reading the briefs, it seems pretty clear that Santana and her husband were a couple of assholes about this package, but I don’t think they should have been convicted of a crime over it nor receive a public reprimand over it. But those are the rules. Hopefully it doesn’t effect her husband’s med school career. I think if they were a little older and wiser they probably wouldn’t have had to go through this. Too bad they didn’t live in Las Vegas either. Metro wouldn’t have even responded to this call. Henderson PD, with their one emergency call a day, was all over this package lol.
I think if you are a thief of your neighbors’ medical supplies and try to hide evidence by throwing away the box that has your neighbors address on it, after telling your neighbor that you don’t have their package, it probably should effect your career.
@12:55 agree ESH, but I still call bullshit on OBC. Getting into a neighborly dispute and acting like ass should not be a bar matter. What does that have to do with being an attorney? Other than OBC seeing every single blip as a cause to hammer someone and destroy their professional life, this is not a bar matter. It’s a couple of grownups who aren’t acting like grownups.
Does this mean OBC now gets added as an interested party any time an attorney gets divorced? Does OBC get to be involved in HOA disputes when an attorney is at odds with their own HOA? Does OBC get involved when an attorney gets in a fender bender and sues the person who hit them OR gets sued by the person they hit? What’s the limit here? Because it seems to be that Hooge & Co have no limit. Based on the cases they’ve prosecuted thus far, it appears that they think they have no limit. They get to go after anyone, any where, any time they want. No one is perfect and yet they act like we should all be perfect or lose our license. Insanity.
12:55 PM here. To clarify, we are on the same page. I strive to follow the NRPC. I am not perfect, but I take it seriously. In spite of my efforts, I could be targeted at any time, and honestly that aggravates some mental health issues I deal with. If I follow the rules, I shouldn’t have to worry about OBC. But I do worry, very much. I have a family to support.
1:58 here. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to make it sound like I was disagreeing. I was just expanding on your point. I hope you’re okay. Hopefully the Hawkins fiasco has attracted enough attention from the powers that be and OBC gets reined in. I too experience a lot of unnecessary stress based on OBC’s behavior.
Most of you shocked and surprised likely did little to look into this. She was convicted after a lengthy trial and two unsuccessful. The facts as determined at trial and set forth on appeal, including descriptions of video, support some finding of discipline. The bar was kind to use what appears to be her description of events.
I read the record over the weekend. Being an asshole is not the basis for discipline. I understand there was a “conviction” but for the Bar to proceed here at all, or with anything more than a private admonition is indefensible. This, coupled with the public defender case, seriously erodes my trust in OBC. I was dismissive of the vague complaints in the comments on this blog. There is a problem at OBC. I’m not saying Dan Hooge needs to be fired (but maybe he does?), but I am saying that there needs to be some serious recalibration in that office.
“The petition shall be accompanied by the panel’s recommendation regarding the appropriate disciplinary action, if any, to be imposed under these or any other rules of the supreme court that pertain to the conduct of attorneys.”
RPC 8.4(b): “(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;”
No, the real question is how the fuck does this dispute over supplements have anything to do with the “honesty, trustworthiness or fitness” to practice law? I’ll concede that the attorney here was an asshole. She will have to answer to Jesus for that, but shouldn’t have had to answer to Bar Counsel. Ridiculous.
Because it was charged as theft. SCR 111(6): The term “serious crime” means (1) a felony and (2) any crime less than a felony that adversely reflects on the attorney’s fitness to practice law, or involves improper conduct as an attorney, interference with the administration of justice, false swearing, misrepresentation, fraud, willful failure to file an income tax return, deceit, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, theft, or an attempt or a conspiracy or solicitation of another to commit a “serious crime.”
Get convicted of a “serious crime”, even if it’s misdemeanor shoplifting, and SCR 111(7) starts the suspension ball rolling.
Guest
Anonymous
August 2, 2024 4:31 pm
Random question regarding the D. Nev.’s new “consent form” for cases assigned to magistrate judges. Since January of 2024, a percentage of cases are getting automatically assigned to MJs and a party has to actively reject MJ jurisdiction.
Obviously, there’s no problem with this assignment system as a general matter; plenty of jurisdictions will assign a portion of their cases to MJs. As someone who clerked for both a DJ and an MJ, I remember throwing myself into the MJ-consent cases I worked on with a ton of enthusiasm because it was a more unique experience.
The real problem with the form is that it requires, for the first time, an attorney to go on record if they don’t consent to MJ jurisdiction. The local rules require only that the parties discuss MJ jurisdiction at their 26f, but didn’t require specifying who took which position in the publicly filed order. For pretty obvious reasons, no one wants to have to tell a specific judge “no, I don’t want you presiding on my case.”
Worse, because the form has to be returned within 21 days of the first “appearance,” and because service of a complaint takes 21 days, the structure basically guarantees that Plaintiffs counsel will have to go on record regarding their preference before defense counsel even has to consider whether they might consent or not.
Am I crazy for thinking that it is fundamentally unfair to one side of the V to require plaintiffs’ counsel to go on record before the other side even has to weigh in on an issue like this?
Do we still need Latin? Si Senor
Engorgio Skullus
Solo/small firms – recommendations for local bank for operating/IOLTA accounts? Just looking for something easy to work with
Bank of Nevada
Appreciate it
A lot of attorneys also use Nevada State Bank. However, I have always had excellent luck at Bank of America and Well Fargo. Their small business bankers are the best in the business.
I thought B of A stopped handling IOLTA accounts about 5 years ago ?
No, BoA still handles IOLTA accounts. They’ve had mine in both CA and NV for well more than a decade
I have had such a terrible experience with Wells Fargo that I switched to Nevada State Bank. SOOO much better!!!!!
1135am here.
I used Wells from 2002, when I went solo to about 2005 when the BofA was just more convenient. Used BofA until 2014, with never a hiccup. Returned to Wells in 2019 and have never looked back.
I am not sure what bad experiences you have had (not doubting them), but for this guy, both have been very good to me and never a glitch or dispute in well over 20 years.
Wells Fargo has admitted to opening fake accounts to steal millions of dollars from its customers, illegally repossessing service members’ cars, and fraudulently placing unnecessary insurance to steal from auto loan borrowers. That list doesn’t include all the credible allegations they bank denies. I get that it’s a hassle to switch bank accounts but it boggles my mind that any new customer would choose a bank that steals from you when there are so many other options.
We use G Bank for operating and IOLTA and also have an IOLTA at B of A. G Bank is way, way more personal. We have a specific person that knows us and is easy to communicate with about any questions or issues. With BofA, there are different people almost every time I need something.
Even though banks today are notorious for being impersonal institutions, it still helps if you make sure the branch manager knows who you are. If you are dealing with WF or BofA, find a smaller and less busy branch, not one that looks like the waiting room at a bus station when you walk in. Things will go more smoothly and they will be less inclined to look at you like you’re a drug dealer/fraudster/international terrorist when you come in with a big check, particularly if you are using a POA to deposit checks made payable to both you and the client. Sounds 1950’s quaint, but I think it helped me quite a bit when I first opened my own practice. Prior to that, I had the experience of a teller not even knowing what an IOLTA was, or refusing to accept a POA without “running it by the home office first,” etc. Personal relationships still matter.
I went and saw Ozzie once. It was cool to see him and feed him, but it was super sad that he was stuck in Henderson with a bunch of lions. I hope they don’t try to replace him with another.
I’m so old i remember when Mike Hines had a giraffe (and other exotics) at his place over off of Sahara and Lindell.
I’ll bet they do try and replace him. His paintings were one of their primary source of revenue. And it’s all about the money.
Family law attorneys – is it just me or do all peremptory challenges end up being reassigned to Dept P?!
Opposing Counsel filed a peremptory challenge against t and we ended up in H.
I’ve noticed that too. TBH I actually don’t mind it as much now. Pre-2020 it was no bueno and while that dept still has issues, it’s no where near as bad as it was.
As a canon lawyer and civil attorney, canon law absolutely needs Latin (Latin remains the official language), civil law, it is nice to have Latin usage, but certainly not necessary.
TIL that ‘Canon Law’ is a thing.
Canon Law is very interesting. There are a few canon lawyers in town. Catholicism isn’t the only religion that has (or had) an ecclesiastical structure to adjudicate civil disputes. Judaism still does. Mormonism used to. There are others.
I work in family court so I speak gibberish and pig Latin
sic verum est
Did anyone read the Letter of Reprimand to Susana Santana? Very bizarre facts
https://nvbar.org/wp-content/uploads/Santana-Susana-LR-04-03-2024.pdf
Just read about it. I cannot believe she received a public reprimand over that. Deranged.
In August 2021, FedEx misdelivered a package with $291.48 worth of supplements to your residence occupied by you and your husband, despite the package being properly labeled for your adjoining neighbor’s residence. After your efforts to return the package to your neighbors were rejected, you ultimately shipped the package back to the sender. In the meantime, your neighbors filed a report with the local police. Your neighbors were reimbursed for the package cost. However, your role in the mishandling of their package resulted in your neighbor’s filing a report with local law enforcement and with the State Bar of Nevada (“State Bar”).
WAIT, she tried to return the package to her neighbor who refused it, so she mailed the package back? What exactly did she do wrong? This is absolutely absurd.
Go read the record. There is a little more to it than that. Still, this never should have been pursued by the Bar.
This is wrong. The discipline panel stated “After your efforts to return the package to your neighbors were rejected…”
There were no other facts given, but if she tried to return and the neighbor rebuffed, then what was she supposed to do? Shipping it back is what I would have done.
The problem is that the Henderson JP found her guilty. Based on what’s said in the Committee report, it is hard to fathom the logic of JP: no damages, packaged delivered to her through no fault of her own, reasonable efforts to correct by returning, and then shipping it back when the neighbor refused.
That said, the conviction is the cause for the reprimand. But on these facts, OBC should have declined to consider it. Appears over zealous.
FUCKIN’ INSANITY.
The baseline discipline is suspension? The fuck?
She sold her house to get away from her psycho neighbors.
Now, an otherwise ethical attorney has her professional record marred forever because of some misdelivered supplements???????
That is bizarre. I read it twice and still have no idea what she did wrong other than live next to some obvious assholes.
holy cow. if this is representative of what the OBC is doing, then I get why there are so many complaints on here. Either we are missing some details about how she got convicted or this is really messed up.
$1,500.
OBC wants that paper.
Yeah – the underlying conviction was not warranted or justified. But based on the conviction, that’s the ball game. It should have been a private reprimand, but that is not an option.
This is disgusting. I’d love to know who the neighbor knows in HPD. OBC is out of control. I’m genuinely making plans to leave this state and OBC is part of that decision. Practicing here has become an exercise in misery.
Utah is completely different. Come on up.
Nevada attorneys are generally not equipped to practice in Utah.
Signed by Jay Shafer, who took in Chris Reade as his paralegal and then as his partner after Reade got his license back (which I presume Shafer helped Reade with).
Why am I not surprised
It is theft to send a misshipped item back to the sender? This is nuts did she have a lawyer? Gotta writ that next time.
C-22-370483-A, read the appeal and decide for yourself, seems more complicated than the bar letter indicates.
Thank you for providing the case number.
Yeah, after reading the briefs, it seems pretty clear that Santana and her husband were a couple of assholes about this package, but I don’t think they should have been convicted of a crime over it nor receive a public reprimand over it. But those are the rules. Hopefully it doesn’t effect her husband’s med school career. I think if they were a little older and wiser they probably wouldn’t have had to go through this. Too bad they didn’t live in Las Vegas either. Metro wouldn’t have even responded to this call. Henderson PD, with their one emergency call a day, was all over this package lol.
I think if you are a thief of your neighbors’ medical supplies and try to hide evidence by throwing away the box that has your neighbors address on it, after telling your neighbor that you don’t have their package, it probably should effect your career.
In the parlance of Reddit, ESH. Including OBC. Terrible exercise of discretion.
@12:55 agree ESH, but I still call bullshit on OBC. Getting into a neighborly dispute and acting like ass should not be a bar matter. What does that have to do with being an attorney? Other than OBC seeing every single blip as a cause to hammer someone and destroy their professional life, this is not a bar matter. It’s a couple of grownups who aren’t acting like grownups.
Does this mean OBC now gets added as an interested party any time an attorney gets divorced? Does OBC get to be involved in HOA disputes when an attorney is at odds with their own HOA? Does OBC get involved when an attorney gets in a fender bender and sues the person who hit them OR gets sued by the person they hit? What’s the limit here? Because it seems to be that Hooge & Co have no limit. Based on the cases they’ve prosecuted thus far, it appears that they think they have no limit. They get to go after anyone, any where, any time they want. No one is perfect and yet they act like we should all be perfect or lose our license. Insanity.
12:55 PM here. To clarify, we are on the same page. I strive to follow the NRPC. I am not perfect, but I take it seriously. In spite of my efforts, I could be targeted at any time, and honestly that aggravates some mental health issues I deal with. If I follow the rules, I shouldn’t have to worry about OBC. But I do worry, very much. I have a family to support.
1:58 here. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to make it sound like I was disagreeing. I was just expanding on your point. I hope you’re okay. Hopefully the Hawkins fiasco has attracted enough attention from the powers that be and OBC gets reined in. I too experience a lot of unnecessary stress based on OBC’s behavior.
Like it or not, there was a misdo conviction. Blame the judge not OBC. Your analogies all fail with this one fact.
If this happened to me, I’d be furious . . . . DO NOT VOTE for Michelle Leavitt!
That does it for me. If I get a package for a neighbor, its going in the effing trash.
or Sandra Digiacomo who prosecuted this nonsense in Henderson.
Most of you shocked and surprised likely did little to look into this. She was convicted after a lengthy trial and two unsuccessful. The facts as determined at trial and set forth on appeal, including descriptions of video, support some finding of discipline. The bar was kind to use what appears to be her description of events.
I read the record over the weekend. Being an asshole is not the basis for discipline. I understand there was a “conviction” but for the Bar to proceed here at all, or with anything more than a private admonition is indefensible. This, coupled with the public defender case, seriously erodes my trust in OBC. I was dismissive of the vague complaints in the comments on this blog. There is a problem at OBC. I’m not saying Dan Hooge needs to be fired (but maybe he does?), but I am saying that there needs to be some serious recalibration in that office.
A question from the cheap seats; can someone please explain how BC is to not comply with the multiple “shall” clauses found in SCR 111(4)?
Also, if the court or the “victim” notifies the OBC of the criminal conviction, how does RPC 8.4(b) not apply?
“The petition shall be accompanied by the panel’s recommendation regarding the appropriate disciplinary action, if any, to be imposed under these or any other rules of the supreme court that pertain to the conduct of attorneys.”
IF ANY, dumbass.
RPC 8.4(b): “(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;”
No, the real question is how the fuck does this dispute over supplements have anything to do with the “honesty, trustworthiness or fitness” to practice law? I’ll concede that the attorney here was an asshole. She will have to answer to Jesus for that, but shouldn’t have had to answer to Bar Counsel. Ridiculous.
Because it was charged as theft. SCR 111(6): The term “serious crime” means (1) a felony and (2) any crime less than a felony that adversely reflects on the attorney’s fitness to practice law, or involves improper conduct as an attorney, interference with the administration of justice, false swearing, misrepresentation, fraud, willful failure to file an income tax return, deceit, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, theft, or an attempt or a conspiracy or solicitation of another to commit a “serious crime.”
Get convicted of a “serious crime”, even if it’s misdemeanor shoplifting, and SCR 111(7) starts the suspension ball rolling.
Random question regarding the D. Nev.’s new “consent form” for cases assigned to magistrate judges. Since January of 2024, a percentage of cases are getting automatically assigned to MJs and a party has to actively reject MJ jurisdiction.
Obviously, there’s no problem with this assignment system as a general matter; plenty of jurisdictions will assign a portion of their cases to MJs. As someone who clerked for both a DJ and an MJ, I remember throwing myself into the MJ-consent cases I worked on with a ton of enthusiasm because it was a more unique experience.
The real problem with the form is that it requires, for the first time, an attorney to go on record if they don’t consent to MJ jurisdiction. The local rules require only that the parties discuss MJ jurisdiction at their 26f, but didn’t require specifying who took which position in the publicly filed order. For pretty obvious reasons, no one wants to have to tell a specific judge “no, I don’t want you presiding on my case.”
Worse, because the form has to be returned within 21 days of the first “appearance,” and because service of a complaint takes 21 days, the structure basically guarantees that Plaintiffs counsel will have to go on record regarding their preference before defense counsel even has to consider whether they might consent or not.
Am I crazy for thinking that it is fundamentally unfair to one side of the V to require plaintiffs’ counsel to go on record before the other side even has to weigh in on an issue like this?