She is pure chaos and would be a terrible Governor. But because she has no chance of winning, she’s the perfect “fuck you” vote to the two party system. Will absolutely vote for her.
No, we have a duopoly that even stunning looks cannot overcome. She has no chance of winning and I look forward to the chaos her campaign creates and voting for her.
We need more civil judges. Because some of the judges we have don’t carry a damn civil caseload my hearings are getting set 7 or 8 weeks out. OSTs might get set in 4 weeks. And they are taking forever to make decisions. Even if I get a hearing in 30 days, decisions don’t trickle in for weeks.
I’d settle for better judges if we can’t get more judges. Maybe it’s just me but it seems that 20 years ago, judges weren’t so dilatory in issuing orders because they knew the law and were decisive on difficult issues. Now it’s more of a “gee whiz, I’d better think about this for a few months and then make my law clerk whip up some vague order.”
Want better judges? Pay them more, provide them better support staff, so our best civil practitioners don’t have to take so much of an earnings hit, which discourages the best candidates from running.
And support raising the revenue needed to pay for it. Ah, there’s the real rub. Can’t or won’t spend the political capital necessary to get this through Carson City and, to the extent county commissions are in control of funding (which they largely are when it comes to the support apparatus for district courts), through county commissions too.
also disappointing: When you appear at a hearing and the judge has not read the motion, and the law clerk’s case note to the judge is the wrong law or wrong application.
Here’s one of the clearest indicators that our bench as a whole is woefully inept: only four district court judges out of thirty-two are permitted to hear homicide cases. That’s 7/8 district court judges that can’t be trusted to sit as a judge over murder cases. Why is that okay? Why do we accept that? Any backwoods judge anywhere else in the country can handle a murder case, but here? Nope. What are going to do next, section off civil judges who can’t handle anything more complex than a slip and fall?
Not permitted to hear, or administratively organized to ensure practitioners with the most experience in homicide cases are tracked to JPs and DJs with relevant experience?
You really want a purely random assignment of all kinds of criminal cases amongst all district judges? Okay, but you’re probably going to increase error rates in homicide cases, and you might not want to do that in homicide cases for all sorts of (what should be obvious) reasons.
I think that’s 1:41’s point. Why are we expecting that other judges will have higher error rates? We should expect that a sitting district court judge is competent enough to preside over any criminal cases, but somehow we’ve settled for a bottom-tier bench.
It was supposedly to help get rid of the backlog of murder cases and move them along quicker. It has been woefully inept at both.
Another issue is all the specialty courts. These do not need district court judges to preside over. Most of the tasks are ministerial. When someone successfully completes a specialty court, or fails to complete it, the cases go back to the original department anyway. It’s a waste to use our judges in this manner. But they all want the grant money and to be able to say they handles this specialty court or the other. Instead of hearing cases!!
By the way there was little to no criteria. Leavitt never protested a murder trial as an attorney. Kierney and Jones may have handled one or two. JB is the only one who had a murder trial resume.
We don’t need the speciality courts. We don’t need homicide or business courts. We just need judges back in the trenches handling civil cases and making decisions. I had a hearing nearly 50 days ago and still don’t have a decision.
I will submit orders and not hear a peep for over a month.
I am tired of judges holding CLEs to tell us how to win MSJs when you won’t make decisions on the MSJs I file.
The bench has never been this slow. And don’t get me started on the civil judges being tasked with handling criminal calendars. Imagine being an insurance defense attorney for decades, taking the bench, and then you’re handed child sex assault cases or violent robbery cases and attempt murders and you’re making sentencing decisions.
Peterson was set up for failure. Gall dropped her criminal calendar before she was branded Peterson II.
And don’t get me started on the DA/PD tenured judges handling civil calendars. We’ve got some good ones but I don’t want to walk into court and have the judge ask me to explain the law because they aren’t familiar with it. Have actually had a judge say, “I don’t know anything about civil do explain this to be from the beginning.”
specialty courts: a nod to the fact that not every defendant is beyond rehabilitation with the correct support and accountability. There. Fixed it for you.
Hello, I’m the choir you’re preaching to. Here’s a little insider knowledge: specialty courts are where underperforming district court judges are sent to keep them from causing more damage elsewhere. That’s why Judge Escobar was on the bench for nearly ten years and barely touched a case, she was relegated to specialty courts because there was nothing else she could reliably handle (and even that she couldn’t manage).
As to the civil judges taking criminal cases, most of them do a fair job. Israel for example has been an excellent judge in the criminal realm. But Peterson and Gall…yikes. Krall has also been having a tough time of things in the criminal realm.
Is Danielle Ford a candidate for governor? I’ll vote for her!
Wait a minute, she really is? I was just kidding about voting for her. I thought she was not an actual candidate.
She is an actual candidate and will appear on the ballot as a non-partisan (or no political party) candidate. Not a joke, but it should be.
She is pure chaos and would be a terrible Governor. But because she has no chance of winning, she’s the perfect “fuck you” vote to the two party system. Will absolutely vote for her.
She might win. Because she is cute. That’s all it takes these days.
No, we have a duopoly that even stunning looks cannot overcome. She has no chance of winning and I look forward to the chaos her campaign creates and voting for her.
Oh it still is a joke, and the joke’s on voters.
We need more civil judges. Because some of the judges we have don’t carry a damn civil caseload my hearings are getting set 7 or 8 weeks out. OSTs might get set in 4 weeks. And they are taking forever to make decisions. Even if I get a hearing in 30 days, decisions don’t trickle in for weeks.
I’d settle for better judges if we can’t get more judges. Maybe it’s just me but it seems that 20 years ago, judges weren’t so dilatory in issuing orders because they knew the law and were decisive on difficult issues. Now it’s more of a “gee whiz, I’d better think about this for a few months and then make my law clerk whip up some vague order.”
Want better judges? Pay them more, provide them better support staff, so our best civil practitioners don’t have to take so much of an earnings hit, which discourages the best candidates from running.
And support raising the revenue needed to pay for it. Ah, there’s the real rub. Can’t or won’t spend the political capital necessary to get this through Carson City and, to the extent county commissions are in control of funding (which they largely are when it comes to the support apparatus for district courts), through county commissions too.
I’d settle for better jurors. Also need to pay them more.
Ha. To get better jurors we’d need to improve CCSD and that hasn’t worked very well.
To improve CCSD, we need to get parents to give a shit and break up CCSD, which in turn requires amending the state constitution. Good luck with that.
Why would breaking up CCSD require amending the state constitution?
also disappointing: When you appear at a hearing and the judge has not read the motion, and the law clerk’s case note to the judge is the wrong law or wrong application.
We need courts dedicated to civil, and other courts dedicated to criminal. AND better judges.
Here’s one of the clearest indicators that our bench as a whole is woefully inept: only four district court judges out of thirty-two are permitted to hear homicide cases. That’s 7/8 district court judges that can’t be trusted to sit as a judge over murder cases. Why is that okay? Why do we accept that? Any backwoods judge anywhere else in the country can handle a murder case, but here? Nope. What are going to do next, section off civil judges who can’t handle anything more complex than a slip and fall?
Who decided that the other judges were not permitted to hear homicide cases? What are the criteria?
Not permitted to hear, or administratively organized to ensure practitioners with the most experience in homicide cases are tracked to JPs and DJs with relevant experience?
You really want a purely random assignment of all kinds of criminal cases amongst all district judges? Okay, but you’re probably going to increase error rates in homicide cases, and you might not want to do that in homicide cases for all sorts of (what should be obvious) reasons.
I think that’s 1:41’s point. Why are we expecting that other judges will have higher error rates? We should expect that a sitting district court judge is competent enough to preside over any criminal cases, but somehow we’ve settled for a bottom-tier bench.
It was supposedly to help get rid of the backlog of murder cases and move them along quicker. It has been woefully inept at both.
Another issue is all the specialty courts. These do not need district court judges to preside over. Most of the tasks are ministerial. When someone successfully completes a specialty court, or fails to complete it, the cases go back to the original department anyway. It’s a waste to use our judges in this manner. But they all want the grant money and to be able to say they handles this specialty court or the other. Instead of hearing cases!!
By the way there was little to no criteria. Leavitt never protested a murder trial as an attorney. Kierney and Jones may have handled one or two. JB is the only one who had a murder trial resume.
We don’t need the speciality courts. We don’t need homicide or business courts. We just need judges back in the trenches handling civil cases and making decisions. I had a hearing nearly 50 days ago and still don’t have a decision.
I will submit orders and not hear a peep for over a month.
I am tired of judges holding CLEs to tell us how to win MSJs when you won’t make decisions on the MSJs I file.
The bench has never been this slow. And don’t get me started on the civil judges being tasked with handling criminal calendars. Imagine being an insurance defense attorney for decades, taking the bench, and then you’re handed child sex assault cases or violent robbery cases and attempt murders and you’re making sentencing decisions.
Peterson was set up for failure. Gall dropped her criminal calendar before she was branded Peterson II.
And don’t get me started on the DA/PD tenured judges handling civil calendars. We’ve got some good ones but I don’t want to walk into court and have the judge ask me to explain the law because they aren’t familiar with it. Have actually had a judge say, “I don’t know anything about civil do explain this to be from the beginning.”
This has to stop.
Specialty courts. A nod to bow to the “politically correct”
specialty courts: a nod to the fact that not every defendant is beyond rehabilitation with the correct support and accountability. There. Fixed it for you.
We must be living in different cities. I’m pretty sure we’re all beyond rehabilitation at this point.
Hello, I’m the choir you’re preaching to. Here’s a little insider knowledge: specialty courts are where underperforming district court judges are sent to keep them from causing more damage elsewhere. That’s why Judge Escobar was on the bench for nearly ten years and barely touched a case, she was relegated to specialty courts because there was nothing else she could reliably handle (and even that she couldn’t manage).
As to the civil judges taking criminal cases, most of them do a fair job. Israel for example has been an excellent judge in the criminal realm. But Peterson and Gall…yikes. Krall has also been having a tough time of things in the criminal realm.
Krall has also been a disaster in civil. Weird.
“I am tired of judges holding CLEs to tell us how to win MSJs when you won’t make decisions on the MSJs I file.”
That’s funny.
Re the free movie tickets: “First time Joe Lombardo lowered the prices for anybody” is actually a good line lol
I thought the whole thing was pretty cringy. They needed to say no when he said I’m Joe Lombardo and the he should have whined and said C”mon man.
It’s cringe but I thought it struck the right tone about the whole thing – play it up, make some jokes, but don’t act like this was Watergate.
Plus, I’m happy for the Beverly to get whatever publicity it can. That place is awesome.
Any word on when Koppe is retiring? Asking for a friend…
Is she seeking a DJ appointment?
BITE YOUR TONGUE
Don’t you put that evil on us, Ricky Bobby!
Ha. Maybe we could start a go-fund me for a magistrate who will actually do their job.