Similarly Situated

  • Law

  • Public defenders have hatched a plan to use the generous plea bargain obtained by the billionaire Henry Nicholas as a model for plea deals in other cases. [TNI]
  • The California Bar was inundated with negative comments regarding the proposed rule changes to who can practice law. [Professional Responsibility blog]
  • Despite a ruling from the 9th Circuit, Nevada AG Aaron Ford says the state will continue to fight nuclear shipments into Nevada. [KNPR]
  • Racism/political correctness reared its ugly head on Wednesday during the cannabis licensing hearing. [Vegas Inc.]
  • Yesterday, they made closing arguments which are summed up in this article. [TNI]
11 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 4:03 pm

Re: The article on the Racism/PC issue – unrelated to the racism/PC allegations, why should a company go through the licensing process, get approved for a license, and then not be required to actually OPEN a facility? The Helping Hands entity said that they had been approved for the three licenses and because of the litigation, they had to walk away from the $12M sale of one license and the $10.2M sale of a second of their licenses. In other words, they applied for and were granted the license, only to turn around and sell them. It's almost as if the licenses should come with a condition that those who applied for the license must use the license in an actual operating facility for two years before they can sell it, otherwise the license is forfeited.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 6:53 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I was thinking the same thing… if you can buy and sell licenses, what is the regulatory / application process even for? It blows my mind that these licenses would be transferable at all.

How does the regulatory process work for the transferee? I would presume they would have to meet all the same requirements as the original licensee, and the Department of Taxation would investigate that. I wonder if that actually happens.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 7:10 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

You can sell a gaming license. I'd imagine the process would be similar (lots and lots of regulatory oversight and approval of the sale/transfer).

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 10:14 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

@12:10p – Yes, but they don't artificially limit the quantity of gaming licenses. My issue is not that they can sell them (they should be able to) – my issue is if there is a legal limit on the quantity of licenses being distributed, someone shouldn't be able to go in as a straw-man effectively and get a license then immediately turn around and flip the license for a profit. If you apply for the limited quantity of licenses and are awarded one, I think that if you don't use it yourself, you lose it and the next in line should get it. Don't award them to speculators who want to flip the license for a profit – award them to companies that actually intend to use them to do what the license allows them to do.
I'm not a MJ/MMJ licensee nor user, but I just think not having such restrictions is bad for the industry – don't allow speculators and maybe the cost of obtaining a license won't be so much.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 9:42 pm

The lawyer crossed the line with his "Armenian Power" line of questions. Which line did he cross? Here's a list:

Rule 3.1 – Meritorious Claims and Contentions.  A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. . .

Rule 3.4  Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel.  A lawyer shall not:

(e) In trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue . . .

Rule 4.4.  Respect for Rights of Third Persons.

(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person . . .

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 10:19 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

@2:42 – my read of the story was that the questioning attorney (Gentile?) had evidence that the person (witness/defendant/whatever) had obtained a loan from the gang who goes by the name of "Armenian Power" (Armenian Power 13, AP, AP13, whatever they call themselves). Was he asking the question just because the witness/party was Armenian, or was he asking because that's the name the gang goes by and he wanted to know if the witness/party had obtained the loan from that gang. Can a gang now just avoid the use of their name in a court setting against someone of the same race that makes up the majority, if not sole ethnicity, of that gang, simply by naming their gang the name of their country/origin/race/whatever because asking someone of that race would be racist using that name? Come on.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 11:20 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It's a bench trial right? Maybe the questioning was in bad taste but how is it prejudicial?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 16, 2019 11:28 pm

…and the beat goes on…
…and on
..and on

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 18, 2019 12:42 am

How do you get clients if you practice insurance defense?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 18, 2019 2:24 am
Reply to  Anonymous

The great Circle of ID Firms: Associate works for larger firm. Associate does good work, and gains adjusters' appreciation, but not Partners'.

Partners chronically underpay associate. Associate leaves, and uses the relationships developed with adjusters to get work referred out to Associate's solo.

Associate, now Partner's, Good irm grows, and hires new attorney. New attorney does good work and gains the appreciation from adjusters, but not from Partner. . .

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 18, 2019 9:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Thanks