- Quickdraw McLaw
- 20 Comments
- 389 Views
It’s a short week for most of us, but we are going to make it even shorter so we can make it over the river and through the woods before any wintry weather makes granny’s house unreachable for the Thanksgiving holiday. Thanks for reading the blog and commenting and being you! We hope you all have some family and/or friends to meet up with and enjoy a good meal. We wish you all safe travels and we’ll see you back here next week!
It looks like Judge Potter and Judge Marquis have had their probate caseloads reassigned to Judge Crockett, Judge Sturman (who already had 80%) and Judge Atkin. Does anyone know if Judge Potter and Judge Marquis are also going to have their guardianship caseloads reassigned? Judge Sturman still handles most of the guardianships. I appear regularly in front of her and I have to say that she is doing a phenomenal job. She manages to balance compliance with NRS 159 and other procedural mechanisms with keeping the interests of the protected person first. IMO, the work she has done in the past few years has not received the recognition that is deserved. I heard a distressing rumor that all guardianship cases were going to be assigned away from her. I sincerely hope this is not the case.
Thanks Gloria
9:50 AM here. Not Judge Sturman by a long shot. It is sad that sincere praise cannot be given on this blog without that rote "Thanks [person being complimented]" response. It is tired and worn out, 10:19 AM, I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.
Under Administrative Order 19-07, all of Sturman's guardianship cases were going to be reassigned. They are going to B & M. Which is oddly appropriate.
http://www.clarkcountycourts.us/res/rules-and-orders/2019-11-26_08_10_14_administrative%20order%2019-07.pdf
I agree with 10:48. It's sophomoric and old. Give it a rest.
I believe Judge Potter was the one suspended. Is he up to his old tricks? Is this why the reassignment?
I believe Marquis and Potter will continue with(at least some degree) of Guardianship calendar.
Potter did receive a two month suspension about two years ago.
I have conflicting reports as to whether he is keeping his demeanor in check.
He has a tendency to yell at times. He tends to lose it when people are acting somewhat irrational and unreasonable. Seems like no one bothered to tell him(nor has he figured out) that people acting unreasonable, as well as somewhat irrational, is the rule in Family Court contested cases, not the exception.
And with several open seats in Family Court, a word of wise to the candidates.Fashioning yourself as a jurist who will take no b.s, is not necessarily the positive attribute it sounds like. Good judges in Family Court develop remarkable patience. They don't react or explode in the face of most of the b.s. they are subjected to.
Judge Potter is difficult to prep clients for. Sometimes, when I anticipate he will be explosive, he is mellow, other times when I anticipate calm waters, it is Hurricane Bill. He usually gets the law right though, so I personally don't mind choppy waters now and again.
Since we just did a rate the judges for state court, how would everyone rate the federal judges?
In the face of their lifetime appointments? I would rate them very very cautiously.
At this holiday time, I am thankful for Lawdawg and QuickdrawMcLaw. Thanks with your patience with us and frickin "Blawg is dead" guy. And Voldemort. Hope you enjoy your holidays.
State bar email: you must log in to CLE board website to complete your affirmation of attendance, and it can only be done on the website.
NVCLE board website: "Affirmations of Attendance are in the process of being programmed. Please note: if your myNVCLE account currently shows "compliant" for 2019, you will still need to login prior to December 31 to submit your Affirmation of Attendance in order to be fully compliant for 2019."
so what, we have to login daily until you get your crap together and even though we have tried, if we ultimately forget after you get your crap together, we will be fined? Got it.
It's not like the applicable rule amendment was adopted only recently. It was adopted *checks notes* at the end of 2018. So glad it takes nearly a whole year to handle a simple certification.
Please refrain from calling judges "attractive" your legal briefs. https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B289046.PDF
Counsel needs glasses! Calling her "attractive" certainly calls his credibility into question.
@ 10:22 a.m. – You're not the boss of me.
I repeat, my bangs are in my face.
My bangs are in my face….
I do not believe any Family Court Judges are in danger of being called "attractive"
Yes, but in our heavily airbrushed pictures we are gorgeous (and thin!).