Judges tell legislators that new rules next year requiring defendants get an initial hearing within 48 hours of arrest will hit rural courts hard. [Nevada Appeal; Nevada Current]
Student facing attempted murder, sexual assault charges in attack on teacher. [RJ]
Developers, analysts not concerned with market saturation when it comes to adding another arena. [TNI]
The SNWA is proposing a limit on the size of residential swimming pools. [Fox5Vegas]
WTH. So a Verdict was entered on April 5th, 2022. On April 6th (before there is a Judgment, post-trial motions, motions for attorneys' fees, etc) Judge Krall statistically orders the case closed. If this is how she perceives to run her docket, I presume the rest of the rulings are equally ridiculous.
In my experience, every case is marked "closed" pretty much as soon as the verdict comes in, and will then show as "reopened" once post-trial motions are filed. This is not unique.
At 1:18– Not the facts in this case. Doctor said "The patient needs this medicine". Insurance company said "We have had this reviewed by a physician who has found the therapy (proton therapy) to be experimental and expressly excluded under the policy."
Yes, proton therapy is SO experimental that it's covered by medicare. (eyeroll) It is not experimental. Insurance companies withhold life saving therapies all the time because it is not in their stockholder's interest, insureds be damned. I'm delighted to see a health insurance company be held accountable for once. I hope the verdict gives the Eskew family some peace of mind.
You know it was closed only for statistical purposes, right? So that the department can show the Chief Judge that they have one fewer case pending for trial? And that the statistical closing has zippo to do with post-trial activity and has no real-world effect at all?
So someone who is insured under a managed care organization (thereby agreeing to pay less money for insurance in exchange for limited access to coverage) is awarded $200 million when the insurer denies their claim for treatment that the plaintiff's own doctor couldn't testify would have any effect on prolonging his life/preventing his death? Am I missing something?
@5:42 Yes, you are missing something. People are sick and tired of paying thousands and thousands of dollars for insurance and then being denied treatment. No doctor is going to go on record and say with absolute 100% certainty that a specific treatment is guaranteed to prolong life or prevent death. That is not how science works. That does not mean that insurance companies get to take our money and filter it directly into shareholder's and executive's pockets while denying claims for coverage. The law is a reflection of society's values and the jury sent a message that this kind of behavior by insurance companies is not going to continue to be tolerated. Every contract has an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and that is what insureds are entitled to.
I get that there need to be some guardrails so that the insurance company isn't being asked to pay for magic healing energy crystals or something, but beyond that, if a board-certified specialist says that it's medically necessary, then it's medically necessary. They have no business second-guessing the clinician who has actually been treating the patient.
I think some people see "MD" and assume they are an expert. One doctor's opinion doesn't mean it is a fact. How many people died of COVID and were prescribed Ivermectin by a doctor who claimed the medicine was "medically-necessary"? If the insurance denies the treatment, are they entitled to $200m?
3:24, well in that case it would be helpful that Merck, the manufacturer of ivermectin, said that it doesn't work. But point taken.
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 6:50 pm
48 Hour Bail Hearing
Courts have to have a 48 hour probable cause hearing already. Yes, LV Muni and Justice Courts used to do this only M-F, so a detainee might not get a hearing and sit in jail for an extra day or two. But it seems to me that the intent of the 48 hour rule, for both PC and bail, was intended to avoid detainees being in jail for extended periods. I think the rural courts will have to suck it up.
The standard is to have a "neutral magistrate" review the facts of the detention in order to determine if probable cause exists. A formal hearing is not required, only a review and determination.
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 9:56 pm
Big Horn just got $9 million verdict.
Guest
Anonymous
April 12, 2022 6:08 am
Anyone see the Nevada Current article today about a guy called Robin Hood 702.
Crazy stuff happening in judicial proceedings last week. Any thoughts what the hell is going on with DA, Judge Baucum and this defendant?
Craziest part of that is the chief justice of the peace gave an interview about a pending case…
Guest
Anonymous
April 12, 2022 11:18 pm
These candidates use these empty aspirational buzzwords. But nothing changes. I appreciate the candidate who disclosed their intent to impose mandatory insurance. I will be sure not to vote for them.
$200m verdict last week against Sierra Health. $40m in compensatories, $160m in punitives.
Bad faith? civil conspiracy with southwest medical? any idea what the case was about?
I'd love to hear details of that case. Case number?
A-19-788630-C | Sandra Eskew, Plaintiff(s) vs. Sierra Health and Life Insurance Company Inc, Defendant(s)
Bad faith.
WTH. So a Verdict was entered on April 5th, 2022. On April 6th (before there is a Judgment, post-trial motions, motions for attorneys' fees, etc) Judge Krall statistically orders the case closed. If this is how she perceives to run her docket, I presume the rest of the rulings are equally ridiculous.
Wow! Good for the plaintiffs. My insurance company makes me jump through hoops for basic treatment. I have no sympathy for those blood suckers.
Every time I try to get a script filled for my monthly maintenance drugs, it takes 9 hours from costco and my insurance. total bullshit.
Doctor, who went to years of medical school, residency, training, and has practiced for years: "The patient needs this medicine"
Insurance adjuster, no medical training: "Nah, I'm not feelin it. Denied."
In my experience, every case is marked "closed" pretty much as soon as the verdict comes in, and will then show as "reopened" once post-trial motions are filed. This is not unique.
@ 2p – You shouldn't close it until after the Judgment on Jury Verdict is signed and filed. A verdict is not the judgment.
At 1:18– Not the facts in this case. Doctor said "The patient needs this medicine". Insurance company said "We have had this reviewed by a physician who has found the therapy (proton therapy) to be experimental and expressly excluded under the policy."
Yes, proton therapy is SO experimental that it's covered by medicare. (eyeroll) It is not experimental. Insurance companies withhold life saving therapies all the time because it is not in their stockholder's interest, insureds be damned. I'm delighted to see a health insurance company be held accountable for once. I hope the verdict gives the Eskew family some peace of mind.
12:01,
You know it was closed only for statistical purposes, right? So that the department can show the Chief Judge that they have one fewer case pending for trial? And that the statistical closing has zippo to do with post-trial activity and has no real-world effect at all?
So someone who is insured under a managed care organization (thereby agreeing to pay less money for insurance in exchange for limited access to coverage) is awarded $200 million when the insurer denies their claim for treatment that the plaintiff's own doctor couldn't testify would have any effect on prolonging his life/preventing his death? Am I missing something?
@5:42 Yes, you are missing something. People are sick and tired of paying thousands and thousands of dollars for insurance and then being denied treatment. No doctor is going to go on record and say with absolute 100% certainty that a specific treatment is guaranteed to prolong life or prevent death. That is not how science works. That does not mean that insurance companies get to take our money and filter it directly into shareholder's and executive's pockets while denying claims for coverage. The law is a reflection of society's values and the jury sent a message that this kind of behavior by insurance companies is not going to continue to be tolerated. Every contract has an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and that is what insureds are entitled to.
5:42, a managed care plan is limited access to choice of doctors. It doesn't (or at least shouldn't) mean limited access to care.
I get that there need to be some guardrails so that the insurance company isn't being asked to pay for magic healing energy crystals or something, but beyond that, if a board-certified specialist says that it's medically necessary, then it's medically necessary. They have no business second-guessing the clinician who has actually been treating the patient.
I think some people see "MD" and assume they are an expert. One doctor's opinion doesn't mean it is a fact. How many people died of COVID and were prescribed Ivermectin by a doctor who claimed the medicine was "medically-necessary"? If the insurance denies the treatment, are they entitled to $200m?
3:24, well in that case it would be helpful that Merck, the manufacturer of ivermectin, said that it doesn't work. But point taken.
48 Hour Bail Hearing
Courts have to have a 48 hour probable cause hearing already. Yes, LV Muni and Justice Courts used to do this only M-F, so a detainee might not get a hearing and sit in jail for an extra day or two. But it seems to me that the intent of the 48 hour rule, for both PC and bail, was intended to avoid detainees being in jail for extended periods. I think the rural courts will have to suck it up.
Except 48 hours means 48 hours. So you are right, the 48 hour statute was intended to avoid detainees being in jail for more than 48 hours.
The standard is to have a "neutral magistrate" review the facts of the detention in order to determine if probable cause exists. A formal hearing is not required, only a review and determination.
Big Horn just got $9 million verdict.
Anyone see the Nevada Current article today about a guy called Robin Hood 702.
Crazy stuff happening in judicial proceedings last week. Any thoughts what the hell is going on with DA, Judge Baucum and this defendant?
Cannot be any worse than beimg in front of Miranda Du.
Craziest part of that is the chief justice of the peace gave an interview about a pending case…
These candidates use these empty aspirational buzzwords. But nothing changes. I appreciate the candidate who disclosed their intent to impose mandatory insurance. I will be sure not to vote for them.