- Quickdraw McLaw
- 25 Comments
- 271 Views
- Judge Gloria Sturman is giving the lawyers involved a chance to come up with a probate plan for the estate of Stephen Paddock. [RJ]
- Here is must-see video from one of Trump’s judicial nominees whose lack of experience and knowledge about some basic legal procedure is sure to make you feel like you are qualified to be a federal judge too. [NPR]
- Some of you were discussing this in the comments the other day, but given the time of year and the nature of our profession, it can’t be said enough: there is help available. If you are struggling, depressed, stressed, suicidal, or all of the above, please reach out for help.
Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers Program
Confidential help from a fellow lawyer is a phone call away
Toll Free: 866-828-0022
If you, or any lawyer in Nevada, are in need of confidential assistance with an alcohol, drug, depression, stress or gambling problem, help is readily available through the LCL Hotline.When calling, leave your first name and telephone number. A fellow lawyer, who has also had problems, will call you back. You’ll be listened to with an understanding heart rather than scorn, judgment and condemnation. You can talk frankly. The person returning your call is solving problems just like yours, and is living happily and usefully doing so.
In addition to Petersen being a train wreck, Senator Grassley came out yesterday and indicated that 2 additional Trump nominees would not be confirmed by the Senate, including Brett Talley. Talley was the nominee for the bench in Alabama who has 3 years of legal experience. That was not enough to disqualify him from the Bench. However his online writing about support for the "real KKK" apparently was.
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-nation/2017/12/13/Sen-Chuck-Grassley-says-two-of-Trump-s-controversial-judicial-nominees-won-t-be-confirmed/stories/201712130229
How do you not know what a Motion in Limine is? I mean like even enough to bullshit an answer to it? I don't even have a litigation practice and I know what that is. That's just general legal knowledge.
(I mean I'm sympathetic to not knowing the difference between Younger and Pullman abstentions, because I wouldn't have either because it's not my practice area, but at least I am familiar with the concept of federal abstention generally and also I AM NOT ASKING ANYBODY TO MAKE ME A FEDERAL JUDGE WHO HAS TO RULE ON THESE THINGS.)
This clown better not be confirmed. Sad!
Surprise! He's a BYU grad (undergrad, not the law school).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_S._Petersen
Not really a surprise that a BYU diploma can get you into a top 10 law school like Virginia.
That's not how law school admissions work. A UNLV diploma can get you into a top 10 school just as easily.
@ 11:29 a.m.–um, no. True–BYU is no Ivy league school. But it's also not UNLV undergrad–the Cal Western/Cooley equivalent for undergrad.
I know smart people who went to Cooley. It does not matter where you go to school. I know stupid people who went to Cal
Ask Randall Jones how that Cal Western education is holding him back in the legal profession.
Ask anyone who went to Cooley how many offers to AmLaw 100 firms they had.
A Cooley education won't prevent you from hanging your own shingle and proving yourself, or working your way into a good regional firm. But it definitely won't provide you as many opportunities as a top 20 law school.
If you continue to believe that your alma matar means anything after 3 years in practice, you are absolutely delusional. Performace is what counts. I have fired a dozen booger-eaters with impressive diplomas b/c they cannot talk to a client with any degree of confidence or respect. if you are impressed with your school, send your Mom a sweatshirt, don't use it to tell me why you have 3 prior firms and no book.
https://twitter.com/senwhitehouse/status/941484131757838337
This is just unreal. 99% of Americans won't give a shit, either.
I feel sorry for lawyers who need help and they have an OBC and BOGS who don't give a shit and want to prosecute over a misplaced slice of cheese.
So true. Good analogy.
For those dealing with addiction, OBC takes that in to account as a mitigating factor and will put you in touch with folks who can help with your addiction issues. What is needed is for you to first understand that you need the help. For those that come to the OBC with this understanding and have an acknowledgement for errors made, my experience is that Bar Counsel will work with you.
11:43– God I wish that was true any longer. Ladies and Gentleman, that is not true any longer. Let me be the first to tell you (from personal experience) that getting Bar Counsel to throw in SCR 102.5(2)(h) and (i) will mean nothing and in fact will get you a much more likely path to suspension and more difficult path to reinstatement. If you indicate that you need help, they will push for disability status along with harsher punishment to make sure that you have to push for reinstatement under SCR 116 with strict reinstatement criteria that are getting stricter under the ADKT that the Supreme Court is passing.
As indicated in previous days posts on the topic, the Nevada Supreme Court has pretty clearly flagged in the past two years that mitigation means nothing; the Supreme Court's analysis is purely on the nature of the offense without any consideration of mitigation in the slightest. Please, please, please do not believe anything that OBC tells you regarding mitigation and cooperation; it is a lie and a trap.
So, 10:01, is correct. This is a lovely group of people we have in charge at the State Bar.
Yes. If someone needs help with addictions, it is not wise, IMO, to contact Layers Concerned For Lawyers. The people involved in the program are certainly well-meaning, and most will be pretty good about protecting confidentiality. But things leak out. People have a way of talking. A lawyer counseling another lawyer, may mention to his good friend in the legal profession that I am counseling so in so, but please keep it confidential. But the person he told then tells someone else, and on and on it goes.
So, as potentially problematic as it is to involve such an organization in your personal addictions, that goes ten fold for involving the State Bar. That was a bad idea before current leadership, and is now even a far worse idea.
It's always a bad idea for lawyers to deal with these problems internally, by involving organizations of lawyers, and that is rendered even worse when involving an organization of lawyers who can take your license.
People in other professions have the sense to take these matters to someone completely outside the profession. But we are duped into thinking that speaking to other lawyers who had a similar addiction is a great idea, and we then are deceived into thinking we should make the further(and much greater blunder), when dealing with the organization which can deprive us of earning a living, of assuming that they will view us more sympathetically, and apply mitigation, if we admit that we took money from clients for years to represent them in the most important aspects of their life while we were drunks and/or drug addicts.
It never works, even when one claims they are now seeking help with the addiction. It never serves as mitigation and just makes matters much worse.
Take such problems completely outside the profession. It may not be practical for most lawyers to take a leave of absence for their practice, but I remember a lawyer who took a one month "sabbatical", had other lawyers babysitting his cases for the month, and he went to an out-of-state rehab. clinic. I was the only one who knew the purpose of the sabbatical, and fortunately I'm someone who can keep their mouth shut.
That said, I recognize most lawyers may have practices where they can't take a month off as the cases need consistent attention from that lawyer, and not a substitute lawyer, but I'm attempting to make a broader point. The point is arrange to get help which is as truly as confidential as possible and which is not completely entangled with local attorneys and enmeshed the local legal profession.
11:43 has one thing correct: SBN "will put you in touch with folks who can help with your addiction issues." Unfortunately it is currently the equivalent of calling the FBI to report that you have a cocaine problem and need help. You will get help but be careful what you wish for because you are very likely not going to like it when you get it.
The sad state of our profession is that SBN/OBC/NSC are becoming very good and ensuring that they take lawyers out of the profession and have exactly ZERO programs to try to keep/get lawyers back into the profession. They do not have your interests at heart.
The State Bar and BOGs are all a part of a racket. Let the dumb in, because we lower the passage rate to 0. Charge mortgage payment bar dues, and then kick all the attorneys out who steal the proverbial slice of cheese.
Steve Myrhe is dirty, will do anything to win at all costs and leads a dirty office? You don't say….
"Wooten went on to accuse Myhre, the case’s lead prosecutor, of relying on inaccurate talking points throughout his prosecution strategy and adopting a 'don’t ask, don’t tell' attitude in reference to BLM misconduct. Wooten added that, prior to the investigation, he held Myhre 'in the highest of regards,' but after Wooten’s attempts to report sweeping misconduct went unheard and got him kicked off the case, he now believes Myrhe is clouded by 'extreme' personal bias and 'a desire to win at all costs.'”
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bundy-blm/memo-alleges-government-misconduct-in-bunkerville-standoff-case/
Mythe bet his career on red. Now his misconduct is revealed and his career at USAO is done or at least peaked because there’s no choice but a government caused mistrial, meaning dismissal. And a bar complaint to defend. Always bet on black.
That is an interesting issue that I think the RJ (and the professor at UNLV) got wrong. Myrhe is not a member of the State Bar of Nevada. Myrhe does not have to be a member of the State Bar of Nevada. Therefore I believe he is immune from State Bar complaints. I believe the only remedy against him is that the DOJ has the equivalent of an IG who never, ever finds prosecutorial misconduct.
Myrhe needs to be run out of the legal profession entirely as the BLM guy got it right: he is renowned for win at all costs. He is dangerous, unethical and cannot be trusted as far as you can throw him. The problem is that no one stops the rampant abuses coming out of the USAO. Bogden let Myrhe do whatever he wants so long as it made Bogden look good.
And Kozinski was one of the only judges who would punish prosecutors
Strange confluence of events. Kozinski is out of a job; Myrhe keeps his job.