Well, I just had a bench trial bumped sua sponte from September to April. A bench trial.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 4:52 pm
White attorney here. I've recently finished "White Fragility" and I want to become more aware of ways that I may be perpetuating racism. Would my colleagues of color mind answering some questions?
1. What are the most common ways opposing counsel exhibits racist/racial behavior without realizing it?
2. In what ways are colleagues in your office racist, perhaps without realizing it?
3. What are the most pressing things that we could do, as a profession in Las Vegas, to recognize and address racism?
It's a book title, "White Fragility: Why it's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Fragility) Check it out. It's no Right-leaning screed.
This was a good-faith, humble effort to invite constructive dialogue.
White attorney here. A black friend of mine told me once that he is reminded, one way or another, every day that he's black. Not always in a negative or "racist" way, but just always reminded that he's different, he's the black guy, he's the minority. Sounds exhausting.
Imagine being reminded every day about something that people might judge you on. Being reminded that you're bald. That you have an ugly mole. That you lost an ear in a terrible meat grinder accident. Being told that over and over, even if not in a malicious way would get old fast. But people don't cross the street to avoid walking next to bald guys.
@10:38 – I know the book. It is not difficult to talk about racism. What is difficult is the lies being perpetuated about racism in America. It's total nonsense. It's anti-white, "white privilege" – crap. It is demeaning to minorities too. It implies they are "less than" – because we need books to tell us how to talk to minorities or about racism? So distinguishing.
@10:49 thank you for posting this! I'm 5 minutes in and this is an excellent presentation. Everyone needs to watch…I'm going to be finishing this while "multi-tasking" – working on discovery responses.
To the posters yesterday complaining about political crazies hijacking the blog. You're right. The problem is when QAnon wackos come here it's irresponsible to ignore it and let them dominate the blog discussion because people come here to see what the supposed smart (OK, educated) people think about regional issues or legal issues (like it or not, politics is just arguing over who gets to set the law). If we let the 2012 LVRJ crowd spout propaganda unchecked we allow people to think that's what "the lawyers" think too. It's a vicious cycle. I too wish people would tone it down or make actual arguments instead of sputtering out sentence fragments and lighting things on fire, but I'm not hopeful.
9:52. You just finished reading propaganda. You should critically examine the presumptions in the book, rather than running out to prostrate yourself. Couple of quick points:
If the author's first step is to redefine basic words to make their conclusion work, then they have already lost the argument, e.g. her definition of “racism.” If you start an argument defining a fish as a bird, you can make all kinds of fanciful conclusions, but they are all wrong.
To its credit, the book launches a preemptive defense of its flawed logic by claiming that denying you are a racists….makes you a racist. Being silent is not an option either because you guessed it…silence makes you racist. Denying you are guilty makes you guilty and being silent makes you guilty. Are you comfortable with that logic? We have constitutional amendments that protect us from this type of compelled participation. (I know this is not a government actor but it is being circulated under critical race theory in government and will begin showing up in policy soon).
Does the mantle of white privilege extend to teenagers? Pre-teens? Infants? To DiAngelo the answer is yes. Can you point to any other acceptable ideology which imputes negative connotations to a child based solely on that child's skin color? Hypothetical, is equality served by a poor white kid being denied entry to a college while a rich black child is admitted with lower test scores? Same scenario but strip out race, does that sound fair to you?
The common refrain from its defenders is that it is about "equalizing" between races not vilifying a skin color, but renaming "feces" to "roses" does not make is smell any better. Giving someone an institutional and measurable advantage based on skin color alone is racism, pure and simple. Requiring that someone, even a child, accept additional burdens based on their skin color alone is also racism. We do not impute the sins of the father onto the child.
Another common defense is that it cannot be racism because of disparities in power, which is again absurd. If you make a negative statement about X race in Canada, is it any less racist when you make the same word-for-word statement in say Kenya? Is your definition of racism dependent on the 3x3ft square of land you are standing in? It is a weak defense.
The book is propaganda and anyone trained in critical though, like attorneys, should reject its flawed logic.
Anyone who says he/she don't see color is deluding himself. I see color, I just don't care. It doesn't define the person, and if you think it does you're part of the problem — white OR black OR brown OR yellow . . .
4:05, even if the particular book exaggerates the problem and represents a school of thought that expands the concept of racism to the point it making it useless, the posters questions are still important. Surely, there's still room for improvement.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 4:56 pm
I was told by a federal magistrate that they believe they have a way to begin jury trials, but it would only be one in the entire building each week. And of course, criminal matters must go first for due process reasons. So this magistrate estimated that they would be 4-5 years out on civil jury trials at least. A state court judge also indicated that they would be years away as well. I have heard rumors that as a result they are going to amend the rules to eliminate the five year rule. Anyone else heard the same?
I know there has been a proposal to eliminate the five-year rule. Not sure if it was a direct result of COVID, but certainly that's a factor. If we can't get cases to trial in half a decade then there is a problem.
Well, the Convention Center certainly isn't getting used for anything else these days.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 5:57 pm
I bet if Coyote Springs would hire Brian Padgett to handle their eminent domain lawsuit against the State, that he could cover his two hot checks paid to his former attorney and adversary Amy Esq.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 6:29 pm
What is the condensed story of Padgett? All I know is he basically promised more than he delivered and there was a little hanky panky with the books and records.
These stories can be instructive for all of us. I have been around enough to see colleagues falter, and I think (cross my fingers) that I have been able to avoid ethical pitfalls in part because I learned from their mistakes.
Had a quite large pot company that was involved in every stage of cultivation. Grow facilities, processing, dispensaries, etc. Burned the whole thing to the ground through strange decisions and incompetence. Seems to be mental illness or drugs involved.
Also not a fan of Sisolak's politics, minus the racist, sexist comment above.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 7:56 pm
11:48–it sounds like nothing he could have done would have satisfied you as it appears you dislike democrats, and would never have voted for him no matter what, due to his party affiliation.
I am likewise unhappy with a lot of his performance, but that has to do with his performance–not his party affiliation.
But you wear your partisan views on your sleeve.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 9:16 pm
I'm a white guy and these BLM protests have had the opposite of their intended effect on me. I am tired of being called a racist, homophobe, and blah, blah simply because I am white. To be honest, they overestimate their importance in my life as I don't sped much time thinking about them in any negative way. I am white. Get over it. Take responsibility for yourself and your own life and I will do the same. The last guy that was shot had just digitally raped a woman and had a knife. Don't rape people and run from the police if you don't want to get shot. And before I conclude (and anticipate all the tired retorts of I am using, "some of my best friends are black." I say this because I want to. Through 7 years of college my best friend was black and my girlfriend's mother is Filipina and her dad is black. If they can accept my whiteness so can everyone else. I'm done apologizing.
What is your point? Are you implying 2:16 never thought of whether some folks would not accept them for who they are? That 2:16 himself would not do so? What does 2:16 have to do to demonstrate to your liking that his depth of thought and consideration on the subject is adequate, in your view?
You seem quick to out yourself in 2:16's shoes, did it strike a sensitive spot? Seems 2:16 got it, so maybe stop being Captain Save A Poster and let 2:16's reaponse stand for itself.
Guest
Anonymous
September 1, 2020 10:04 pm
2:16 again: thank u for a thoughtful response and not a snide comment, and u are correct, it must be burdensome and seem to never end
Guest
Laughlin Constable Jordan Ross
September 1, 2020 10:21 pm
Chief Judge Bell in the Civil Bench-Bar meeting today indicated it was unlikely that there would be any civil jury trials this year.
The meeting was well done and informative by the way. There was a good review of a rather large number of civil cases decided by the Supreme Court this summer as well as some in depth discussion of discovery and e-fling issues.
That is horseshit.. No one, hardly anyone is having in person civil hearimg in Fed. Call Du or file a motion. That is outrageous. I would skip the hearing, fuck that.
Speaking of outrageous, not as bad as the mandatory appearance during covid 19, I have a federal judge who is ignoring federal law to the level of 8 times in one proceeding. What is the deadline to file writs or appeals to 9th Circuit? Also, is there a good primer, treatise to work from for filing the appeal? We are appealing. Thank you!
7:50 am: There are no deadlines for writs but the longer you wait, the less persuasive it becomes. There are only certain things you can appeal: a final judgment and some interlocutory appeals when the issue is totally collateral to the underlying action. The deadline for an appeal is contained in FRAP 4.
Well, I just had a bench trial bumped sua sponte from September to April. A bench trial.
White attorney here. I've recently finished "White Fragility" and I want to become more aware of ways that I may be perpetuating racism. Would my colleagues of color mind answering some questions?
1. What are the most common ways opposing counsel exhibits racist/racial behavior without realizing it?
2. In what ways are colleagues in your office racist, perhaps without realizing it?
3. What are the most pressing things that we could do, as a profession in Las Vegas, to recognize and address racism?
Thanks in advance.
You're perpetuating racism by making statements about "white fragility". So demeaning to minorities. Just gross.
Someone trying not be racist is attacked for being racist while trying not to be. That's next-level irony.
9:58,
It's a book title, "White Fragility: Why it's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Fragility) Check it out. It's no Right-leaning screed.
This was a good-faith, humble effort to invite constructive dialogue.
This anti-white, implicitly pro-communist corporate and school environment is sickening.
White attorney here. A black friend of mine told me once that he is reminded, one way or another, every day that he's black. Not always in a negative or "racist" way, but just always reminded that he's different, he's the black guy, he's the minority. Sounds exhausting.
Imagine being reminded every day about something that people might judge you on. Being reminded that you're bald. That you have an ugly mole. That you lost an ear in a terrible meat grinder accident. Being told that over and over, even if not in a malicious way would get old fast. But people don't cross the street to avoid walking next to bald guys.
@10:38 – I know the book. It is not difficult to talk about racism. What is difficult is the lies being perpetuated about racism in America. It's total nonsense. It's anti-white, "white privilege" – crap. It is demeaning to minorities too. It implies they are "less than" – because we need books to tell us how to talk to minorities or about racism? So distinguishing.
This is a very well spent hour of watching and learning.
@10:49 thank you for posting this! I'm 5 minutes in and this is an excellent presentation. Everyone needs to watch…I'm going to be finishing this while "multi-tasking" – working on discovery responses.
To the posters yesterday complaining about political crazies hijacking the blog. You're right. The problem is when QAnon wackos come here it's irresponsible to ignore it and let them dominate the blog discussion because people come here to see what the supposed smart (OK, educated) people think about regional issues or legal issues (like it or not, politics is just arguing over who gets to set the law). If we let the 2012 LVRJ crowd spout propaganda unchecked we allow people to think that's what "the lawyers" think too. It's a vicious cycle. I too wish people would tone it down or make actual arguments instead of sputtering out sentence fragments and lighting things on fire, but I'm not hopeful.
Blog is hijacked.
10:58, you are the problem.
11:23 – you are the problem.
10:58, I see your typos.
White people losing their minds at the mention of "White Fragility" is just great.
9:52. You just finished reading propaganda. You should critically examine the presumptions in the book, rather than running out to prostrate yourself. Couple of quick points:
If the author's first step is to redefine basic words to make their conclusion work, then they have already lost the argument, e.g. her definition of “racism.” If you start an argument defining a fish as a bird, you can make all kinds of fanciful conclusions, but they are all wrong.
To its credit, the book launches a preemptive defense of its flawed logic by claiming that denying you are a racists….makes you a racist. Being silent is not an option either because you guessed it…silence makes you racist. Denying you are guilty makes you guilty and being silent makes you guilty. Are you comfortable with that logic? We have constitutional amendments that protect us from this type of compelled participation. (I know this is not a government actor but it is being circulated under critical race theory in government and will begin showing up in policy soon).
Does the mantle of white privilege extend to teenagers? Pre-teens? Infants? To DiAngelo the answer is yes. Can you point to any other acceptable ideology which imputes negative connotations to a child based solely on that child's skin color? Hypothetical, is equality served by a poor white kid being denied entry to a college while a rich black child is admitted with lower test scores? Same scenario but strip out race, does that sound fair to you?
The common refrain from its defenders is that it is about "equalizing" between races not vilifying a skin color, but renaming "feces" to "roses" does not make is smell any better. Giving someone an institutional and measurable advantage based on skin color alone is racism, pure and simple. Requiring that someone, even a child, accept additional burdens based on their skin color alone is also racism. We do not impute the sins of the father onto the child.
Another common defense is that it cannot be racism because of disparities in power, which is again absurd. If you make a negative statement about X race in Canada, is it any less racist when you make the same word-for-word statement in say Kenya? Is your definition of racism dependent on the 3x3ft square of land you are standing in? It is a weak defense.
The book is propaganda and anyone trained in critical though, like attorneys, should reject its flawed logic.
Anyone who says he/she don't see color is deluding himself. I see color, I just don't care. It doesn't define the person, and if you think it does you're part of the problem — white OR black OR brown OR yellow . . .
4:05, even if the particular book exaggerates the problem and represents a school of thought that expands the concept of racism to the point it making it useless, the posters questions are still important. Surely, there's still room for improvement.
I was told by a federal magistrate that they believe they have a way to begin jury trials, but it would only be one in the entire building each week. And of course, criminal matters must go first for due process reasons. So this magistrate estimated that they would be 4-5 years out on civil jury trials at least. A state court judge also indicated that they would be years away as well. I have heard rumors that as a result they are going to amend the rules to eliminate the five year rule. Anyone else heard the same?
I know there has been a proposal to eliminate the five-year rule. Not sure if it was a direct result of COVID, but certainly that's a factor. If we can't get cases to trial in half a decade then there is a problem.
ADKT 0560
I suspect these are the first of many charges against Mr. Padgett.
Judge Weise recently offered to have a civil non-priority jury trial at the Convention Center in September.
Well, the Convention Center certainly isn't getting used for anything else these days.
I bet if Coyote Springs would hire Brian Padgett to handle their eminent domain lawsuit against the State, that he could cover his two hot checks paid to his former attorney and adversary Amy Esq.
What is the condensed story of Padgett? All I know is he basically promised more than he delivered and there was a little hanky panky with the books and records.
These stories can be instructive for all of us. I have been around enough to see colleagues falter, and I think (cross my fingers) that I have been able to avoid ethical pitfalls in part because I learned from their mistakes.
Had a quite large pot company that was involved in every stage of cultivation. Grow facilities, processing, dispensaries, etc. Burned the whole thing to the ground through strange decisions and incompetence. Seems to be mental illness or drugs involved.
https://www.ktnv.com/news/coronavirus/gov-sisolak-responds-to-viral-pictures-there-is-no-prohibition-on-ambient-background-music
This guy is a typical bloated, white haired, white, male politician who lives by the mantra: "Do as I say, not as I do."
Before COVID he did nothing to diversity NV economy. After COVID, Sisolak has forever EFFED up Nevada. One and done with this loser.
Also not a fan of Sisolak's politics, minus the racist, sexist comment above.
11:48–it sounds like nothing he could have done would have satisfied you as it appears you dislike democrats, and would never have voted for him no matter what, due to his party affiliation.
I am likewise unhappy with a lot of his performance, but that has to do with his performance–not his party affiliation.
But you wear your partisan views on your sleeve.
I'm a white guy and these BLM protests have had the opposite of their intended effect on me. I am tired of being called a racist, homophobe, and blah, blah simply because I am white. To be honest, they overestimate their importance in my life as I don't sped much time thinking about them in any negative way. I am white. Get over it. Take responsibility for yourself and your own life and I will do the same. The last guy that was shot had just digitally raped a woman and had a knife. Don't rape people and run from the police if you don't want to get shot. And before I conclude (and anticipate all the tired retorts of I am using, "some of my best friends are black." I say this because I want to. Through 7 years of college my best friend was black and my girlfriend's mother is Filipina and her dad is black. If they can accept my whiteness so can everyone else. I'm done apologizing.
Think what that's like for minorities, when they say just accept me for who I am.
2:26
What is your point? Are you implying 2:16 never thought of whether some folks would not accept them for who they are? That 2:16 himself would not do so? What does 2:16 have to do to demonstrate to your liking that his depth of thought and consideration on the subject is adequate, in your view?
You seem quick to out yourself in 2:16's shoes, did it strike a sensitive spot? Seems 2:16 got it, so maybe stop being Captain Save A Poster and let 2:16's reaponse stand for itself.
2:16 again: thank u for a thoughtful response and not a snide comment, and u are correct, it must be burdensome and seem to never end
Chief Judge Bell in the Civil Bench-Bar meeting today indicated it was unlikely that there would be any civil jury trials this year.
The meeting was well done and informative by the way. There was a good review of a rather large number of civil cases decided by the Supreme Court this summer as well as some in depth discussion of discovery and e-fling issues.
Like Mr. Zimmerman said: Take a deep breath, feel like you're chokin'/ Everything is broken
That's depressing. How does one join the Bench-Bar meetings?
Federal court is requiring my out of state partner's appearance on a civil matter. Is this a joke?
Which federal judge or magistrate?
Good, spread the covid19. Federal court is now a cess pool.
That is horseshit.. No one, hardly anyone is having in person civil hearimg in Fed. Call Du or file a motion. That is outrageous. I would skip the hearing, fuck that.
Speaking of outrageous, not as bad as the mandatory appearance during covid 19, I have a federal judge who is ignoring federal law to the level of 8 times in one proceeding. What is the deadline to file writs or appeals to 9th Circuit? Also, is there a good primer, treatise to work from for filing the appeal? We are appealing. Thank you!
Which Judge?
Starts with a D
7:50 a.m.: There are resources on the Ninth Circuit website.
7:50 am: There are no deadlines for writs but the longer you wait, the less persuasive it becomes. There are only certain things you can appeal: a final judgment and some interlocutory appeals when the issue is totally collateral to the underlying action. The deadline for an appeal is contained in FRAP 4.
Thanks! Good thing I am licensed there!