- Quickdraw McLaw
- 46 Comments
- 208 Views
- SB 143, a bill on background checks, is first bill to garner a lot of attention in the 2019 legislative session. [TNI]
- Lawyers made closing arguments yesterday in the sexual assault trial of a Metro officer. [RJ]
- There is a raw sewage spill under the CCDC. [KTNV]
- Governor Sisolak appoints Bonnie Bulla to the Court of Appeals. [press release]
Bonnie Bulla was appointed to the Court of Appeala this morning.
Is there an announcement somewhere?
God help us.
Who will be Discovery Commissioner?
Because you appointed Bonnie, I will not be voting for Sisolak. You are an idiot.
A bunch of haters. After dealing with discovery matters and all the pettiness/name calling/abuse between counsel, Commissioner Bulla should be elevated. Hopefully this will result in more decisions (and hopefully citeable ones) on discovery issues.
9:12 is Bonnie.
What is the source of this? I really hope this is real. It would relegate her to one of three voices in an appellate court that rarely issues opinions that can be cited. She will do far less damage there.
I am getting the oven ready to stick my head in it.
This is the best I can come up with by way of an announcement: https://twitter.com/LasVegasCourts/status/1095725196495880192
9:25, works for me.
So now we replace the DC, and then vote for anyone who runs against her in the next election. And we are rid of her. This brightens up a cloudy day!
It's official: http://gov.nv.gov/News/Press/2019/Governor_Sisolak_Appoints_Commissioner_Bonnie_A__Bulla_to_Nevada_Court_of_Appeals/
Ralston is reporting it, Bonnie is in.
9:12 here, not Bonnie. If I were, I probably would have been removed from the discovery commissioner's bench for throwing a few people in jail for non-purgeable contempt.
She is a Bulla bully. Went after me for no reason. She has that in common with Sisolak, both bullies. Rot, Bonnie.
I am throwing a campaign party for Bonnie's opponent, serving Eglet eggs and ham. Sorry, could not help it. WAFJ.
I think this is a great appointment. She has been in a (literally, it seems reading the posts here) thankless job. Has she ruled against me? Yes. Have I thought at times she was dead wrong? Yes again. But I have always been treated with respect and I always understood that there was a legal basis for her decisions. I win some, I lose some. She is a fine judge and I hope she does well in her new position.
Who cares, our COA has been so neutered by the NSC that she will have little impact on anything anymore.
The remark by 10:13 is too broad a generalization and, to some extent, an over-simplification of an issue with more layers of complexity than may be readily apparent.
But although 10:13 paints with too broad a brush, I am afraid that there is a great deal of truth in the remark.
The NSC did not intend such result, and they seem to believe and recognize that the COA is performing a vital function, and in some limited sense that is true. But, as 10:13 suggests, the COA seems to be something of a clearing house for cases deemed not sufficiently important and not quite worthy of the time of the NSC.
As a result, any case wherein the decision will have any degree of serious legal implications, as to changing, extending or reinterpreting important existing laws, seems to be retained by the NSC.
And we see this very often in the area of domestic case. In the relatively few Family Law cases where there is an interesting and important issue of law to address, they will retain those. As to all the other Family Law cases, wherein there is no real important issue of law involved but someone is a saying the court lacked sufficient and accurate findings for its custody rulings, those matters are pushed to the COA. Same with the DMV cases and most other administrative matters. But the difference here is that these administrative matters are presumably assigned to the COA, while the Family Law cases arrive there by the push down method if the NSC does not wish to retain the case.
And this identifies part of the problem 10:13 astutely refers to when he/she stresses how the authority of the COA has been largely gutted and weakened. Although there were some parameters as to certain types of cases which would be assigned to the COA upon filing, there was far too much discretion vested with the NSC as to the "push down" method of the NSC deciding when they wished to send additional cases down to the COA, rather than retaining them.
Most states have a much more historically settled system, and clearer guidelines, and it is clear via procedure, and subject matter of the appeal, which court the matter will proceed in. Most states don't have a system where you don't know where your appeal will ultimately be heard because a higher appellate court can decide from the inception which cases legally intrigue them to the point they wish to retain such cases, and which cases they wish to send downstream.
Seems like far too much discretion. In most states, based on procedure, subject matter and the like, you probably not only know exactly which court to file with, but you probably have a fair degree of certainty that the case will be decided by that court, and not instead directed to a different and higher court because such court found the legal issues raised to be of importance and intriguing.
I've said it before, and I will continue to say it: We don't have an Intermediate Court of Appeals. We have a Shitwork panel of the NSC. The Shitwork Panel handles all the cases the NSC doesn't want to deal with, so that the NSC can continue its history of not issuing useful, logical opinions, except now they have a lower caseload with which to not issue useful, logical opinions.
10:13 here. What 10:37 said.
Hawaii started with a push down model and scrapped it in favor of conventional appellate system. The counter argument is with only one panel the court of appeals would be swamped. The easy answer is to refer specific categories of cases mandatorily to that court with others, such as death penalty, going to the sct on direct appeal.
Democrat has been governor for a month and already we've got gun control and bad judicial appointments. Income tax is coming get ready for it. Vote this clown out of office.
1:58, income tax will take a constitutional amendment, so I doubt it.
On an unrelated matter, I paid bar dues two weeks ago. Is it taking awhile to get our new bar cards?
There won't be "new" bar cards. The ones issued last year are "permanent."
Except what about those of us who did not receive Bar Cards last year? This is just more Kim Farmer folly, foulery and foolery at its finest. If you think there are not enough "F" words with it comes to how she runs the SBN, join the club.
What is the bar card used for? Other than showing the card to security at the courthouse once in a blue moon, I've never seen a use for it.
There is an easy solution to this. Call the bar and request a card. For whatever reason, I never received my annual card and all it took was a quick call to the bar. But, anonymous complaining on a blog is much easier…
Chopping lines. Doy…
The permanent ones are such garbage, mind has peeled apart. Immigration won't accept any proof other than a bar card if you show up to interviews with your client.
I have had correctional facilities require the Bar Card for admission. I am with you– my "permanent one" has already fallen apart.
I want to hear what sexist Dave Thomas has to say about it. What is Bonnie's electability? A big fat zero. I love it how he threw J. Elissa Cadish under the bus.
Commissioner Bulla had an uneven temperament, and would be harsh with attorneys at times for hyper-technical matters of non-compliance, and sometimes she was in fact wrong about those matters and was often not all that well-prepared. And her staff was not user friendly, to put it mildly.
On the other side of the coin, she is generally very well-versed and knowledgeable as to civil litigation, and had some pretty decent civil experience prior to becoming Commissioner. Plus, it's a crushing caseload she was dealing with, and a lot of the tumult and dissatisfaction was caused by unreasonable, difficult, and non-complying attorneys, who were often engage in unnecessary and petty disputes.
I just think it is unfair to blame al the problems on the Commissioner, just like it's unfair to blame all the problems on the lawyers.
That all said, she did not seem to be evolving, or growing with the positon,
in the sense that the uneven temperament, and other shortcomings, seemed to persist to some meaningful extent.
But I think she will do much better on C.O.A. I do have a concern that she appears to have little or no Criminal Law experience, but cases with important Criminal Law issues are often retained by the NSC. Those cases don't tend to get pushed down to the C.O.A. nearly to the extent of some other cases.
As to 9:54, I don't understand the comment that Bulla has no chance of winning a retention election. She will be the incumbent, she is female, and will presumably be well-funded. True that some attorneys who did not like her as a Commissioner may donate a bit to an opponent of Bulla, but I doubt she would have much to worry about(unless she attracts a really, really strong opponent).
I think this is a good appointment. She was clearly not happy as the discovery commissioner and she has a lot of potential as a judge. Now it will be up to her to live up to that potential. If she does, it's a win for everybody. If she doesn't, she won't last on the Court, and it's still a win for everybody. Unless… I cannot imagine who would apply for the thankless job of discovery commissioner. Seriously, we could all be recalling Commissioner Bulla fondly in six months time.
No.
Bring back Tom Biggar.
Did he run the pimp and ho ball?
No, his son did.
This appointment is great. We get a new DC, and we get the chance to throw her out of office in a couple years. Addition by subtraction has never been more appealing.
I agree with 11:37. We get her out as DC and then can kick her out of office with the 2020 election. Who knows as she may be good on the C of A but time will tell and I am sure she will draw several challengers for her seat when the time comes.
I am fat as fyck, and I am ugly. Also, my pits are wet. I need to get out of this profession, doll.
are they replacing women dj's w old whit men
Nevada is well on its way to becoming California. More taxes, regulations, crime, massive public works with the sole purpose of enriching insiders (put on the shock face, Governor). Oh, and they are going to take our guns, too.
I'm sorry, sir. I'll get off your lawn. Please don't shoo…oh wait.
Love Sisolak… He always makes republicans look great!