- Quickdraw McLaw
- 59 Comments
- 228 Views
We hope that each of you have something fun planned this holiday weekend with family and friends. Take a minute and soak it in. If any of you are not feeling so jolly or are struggling right now, please don’t hesitate to ask for help. If any of you are not struggling right now, consider reaching out to those people in your life who might be. A quick message or phone call goes a long way. We wish you all a safe and happy holiday!
Confidential help from a fellow lawyer is a phone call awayToll Free: 866-828-0022Any lawyer in need of confidential assistance with alcohol, drug, gambling problems, depression and stress: help is a phone call away. The LCL hotline will put you in touch with a peer who understands the issues of lawyers today. When you call, all you have to leave is your first name and telephone number, and someone with experience and who understands will call you back. You will be listened to with understanding and support by someone who will give you resources you may not know exist out there. One new benefit of this program is three free therapist sessions for support during stressful events. More details here.
988
Available 24 hours everyday
Merry Christmas, y'all.
I am hiding in my basement listening to trial lawyer podcasts while my in-laws terrorize my children upstairs. Merry Christmas everyone!
I am hiding in my basement listening to trial lawyer podcasts while my in-laws terrorize my children upstairs. Merry Christmas everyone!
I'm trying to enjoy time with my neighbors at breakfast but constantly looking out the window and to the sky (sort of like Ray Liotta in Goodfellas) hoping the Bar doesn't find that nickel mistake the bank made in my trust account back in '95.
Busted! Turn in your license.
Exactly. OBC is like our own lil rain cloud, following us wherever we go.
Judge David Jones: Why leaving? Where going? Leaving before his term is up–elected in 2020 after appointment. Term ends in 2027. One of the better judges. Appointed in 2016. 6 years on bench?
https://ballotpedia.org/David_Jones_(Nevada_judge)
Surprising. One of the better judges for sure. Hope everything is OK.
Quite possibly the best judge we had.
As far as Lawyers Concerned For Lawyers, I know that their hearts are certainly in the right place, that they have actually helped some people, that they tout the confidentiality aspect, etc.
With all that being conceded and understood, there are some legitimate questions and concerns, not the least of which is the implications of sharing serious problems with those working in a program under State Bar auspices.
Law practice problems caused by serious addictions often result in issues which on their face may indicate likely ethics violations–sometimes serious likely ethical violations. The person assigned to assist such individual is,of course, another attorney, who, as mentioned, is involved in this program affiliated with the State Bar.
It is true that the lawyer providing the assistance formerly had addictive problems as well, and thus is sympathetic to the plight of the attorney seeking assistance, as well as being guided by the confidentiality commitment.
But if the information the assisting attorney hears about is serious to the point of suggesting serious violations, it seems like that attorney may perceive that their obligation to protect the public in general, and the affected clients in particular, take priority over the confidentiality concept, and thus they may see their primary obligation in such instances is to report the violations.
And they may be right about that in many instances.
So, all in all, isn't it better and safer for lawyers experiencing these problems to seek immediate corrective and therapeutic help from outside sources, as opposed to keeping these matters internal?
11:50-I've wondered about that. in the past. But perhaps the potential problem you indicate may not be that significant in that this concept of "State Bar affiliation" may be true only in the most general and loose sense.
It could be that the Bar agrees to list this organization, and others, as potentially effective resources to address various problems, while having no actual supervisory or funding connections with Lawyers Concerned For Lawyers.
So, the answer to your question may be determined by learning whether the State Bar has some actual, meaningful connection to this program, or whether the Bar merely lists it as an available resource to deal with these types of issues. It may primarily be a private coalition of attorneys who wish to help.
I've been involved (as a participant, not administratively) with LCL since the mid 1990's and have been continuously clean and sober for 31 years. The best outcomes occur when the addicted lawyer also immerses himself/herself in AA or another similar 12-stem program. LCL is a good place to start; but those who seek help only in LCL tend not to maintain sobriety or significantly improve their lives.
The work of LCL and its involved members overall has a very positive affect on the profession. But it works best when it serves as a starting point in recovery.
The impaired lawyer will often be intensely concerned with what people think of them if he/she involves himself/herself in a recovery program. Its a shame those same people don't have the same concern about how they are perceived as an obviously-impaired person/lawyer. Most suffer under the delusion that no one knows.
I wouldn’t trust any organization affiliated w the bar, including the bar itself. The bar that’ll crucify you if a whiney client files a complaint that you didn’t return all 45 of their phone calls last month is the same bar that gave Doug his license back. What a joke!
12:13 I agree, those that haven’t been raped by the star chamber won’t believe it until it happens to them. Those lawyers are smug … until they’re not. There is one sure fire way to avoid it – sell your soul and your very life to a larger firm.
One of the few LCL volunteers I know may be sober, but he’s also an unethical and shady lawyer (and downright awful human being) who is a serial adulterer, sleeping with (and manipulating) staff, clients, and fellow attorneys. I’ve watched him trick others into believing he’s a reformed, great guy for years. The fact that he’s the point of contact for troubled lawyers is nauseating. And quite frankly, scary. There has to be a better way than letting troubled lawyers get counseled by equally (if not more so) troubled lawyers. Maybe we fund a counseling line that isn’t run by the bar and/or other lawyers?
Do not contact LCL. It is a joke.
Watched Violent Night. If you like a A Christmas story, John Wick, Home Alone, Vikings, and Hugo, this is the perfect get out of the house entertainment that has elements of all these movies. Laughed the whole way through.
Again, information obtained by either LCL or NLAP is both confidential and inadmissible in any state bar proceeding (discipline, admission, administrative). SCR 106.5. Attorneys can get up to three (3), no cost sessions with a mental health counselor with no paper trail. Asking for help is an act of courage, not a sign of weakness. You are not alone in this battle.
But (with all the warnings about getting help somewhere) when that info oddly makes its way to another person who then reports it, watch out. It would not be protected then (otherwise anyone could report something and proactively protect themselves). Don't think that happens? Ever seen a paralegal gossip about what they have seen, computer people, other lawyers, spouses at parties? One of the biggest disbarments was because someone found something on top of a copy machine and reported it. You all know that story. Things get around in this town. But, once again – get help but make the bar a last resort.
This is the first time I’ve ever commented here, but LCL may have saved my life this year. It certainly helped me when I was in a bad place. All of this conspiracy about LCL telling the Bar about your problems is ridiculous. If you are suffering inside, if you are worried about too much drinking, etc., call and get help. I am still going to the same therapist I was referred to (you are provided a choice)……everyone needs a good therapist – especially litigators!
For all of you so intensely concerned with privacy and confidentiality, have you ever considered that those around you already have seen the obvious signs of your problem drinking, drug use, compulsive gambling? You might be greatly overestimating the effectiveness of your efforts to conceal your difficulties. Perhaps you believe they don’t know; but they know.
Really? You mean they knew I was out of control? My story is being released in February.
It really is kind of ironic that addicts and alcoholics make an ugly and public spectacle of themselves while actively practicing their addiction but are nonetheless terrified that someone might become aware of their decision to try and clean up.
I am one of the commenters above who doesn’t trust LCL or the bar. I do not have an addiction problem. I actively take care of my mental health the same way I do my physical health. I still do not trust the bar or LCL one little bit. But thank you for your assumptions. Merry Christmas.
Be grateful you’re not in a position to need LCL. And also, maybe consider keeping your bias to yourself concerning things about which you have not a clue. People have been helped by LCL. Why dissuade anyone from doing something that might save his life? Especially when it’s none of your fucking business.
Not trusting LCL or the bar does not mean I don’t think people should get help. I just wouldn’t do it through the bar. Go to therapy. Go to church. Go to AA. As a member of the bar, it is my fucking business that I and my colleagues pay a bunch of money to be terrorized by those petty tyrants in OBC. They are not trustworthy.
Not commented yet, so it’s only one’s business if they agree with you. People should get help but in MY opinion the lowlifes at the bar cannot be trusted in any way. Only as a last resort go to bar for help imho
The issue here is NOT that people should not get help. It is that the State Bar has destroyed an modicum of trust that used to exist. It is a carrot on the end of a pole held by an organization with a REALLY big stick behind its back.
I wish the SBN would restore the trust and focus on helping lawyers. But Kim Farmer's determination to keep her job at all costs and the OBC becoming Hardesty's private assassination squad since Stan the Hitman took over have destroyed all good will that the State Bar used to enjoy.
In the mean time if you need help, there are resources in this community that can and will help you that are not associated with the State Bar.
Dear 10:15 you hit it right on the head. I used to work at the NSB and I will not say anymore but I am guessing you did too. Your comments hit too close to home.
You worked for NSB or OBC. I'm guessing neither.
10:21 is correct.
LCL isn’t the Bar
Yes it is. Kuzemka, dont trust, is a paid vendor of the bar. Stop posting falsehoods
27 years a lawyer and the last 19 have been as a solo. Never a peep from the Bar. If you take care of your practice and your clients, they don’t come for you.
If you fear the State Bar, maybe it’s time to look at how you conduct your affairs.
And maybe if you’re a self righteous jerk, you just don’t have friends xx
6:25 – Thanks for the post Hooge. Oh wait, it can't be you as that person has experience
This post is unadulterated horseshit. 23 years in (21 as a solo) and I have had 4 complaints from a couple of malcontent clients, and a couple of pro se opposing parties. All were answered and found to be baseless.
Zero chance that OP @625 has never heard a peep from the bar.
9:37-I had the exact same reaction. 6:25 acts as if 27 years without any Bar contact equates with being a great lawyer, and thus, by implication, if the Bar contacts anyone(no matter how frivolous) that such must mean the lawyer has ethical problems.
6:25 acts all pious and sanctimonious, but what is actually occurring here is that either 6:25 has a really limited, largely insignificant practice whereby no one ever gets angry about anything or, more likely, 6:25 is not even an attorney. A third possibility is that 6:25 is simply incredibly lucky, although 6:25 would chalk it all up to being a fabulous attorney.
The most likely, by far, of the three options is that 6:25 is simply not a practicing attorney, as a practicing attorney would realize that no matter how well a lawyer performs that their will always be disgruntled individuals who will report a lawyer, as there is a lot of random irrationality that is an occupational hazard for even the best of attorneys.
I really doubt anyone could practice 27 years and still be totally clueless that many people will complain about an attorney even when, from an objective standpoint, it appears the attorney performed reasonably well or better, and obtained results which are satisfactory or, in many cases, a lot better.
I believe 6:25 because I think I know who 6:25 is. 6:25 is a sanctimonious blowhard if it is who I believe. But 6:25 failed to qualify what sets apart those who have bar complaints from those who do not (and it is not quality of work). It is client base. There are attorneys in this town who represent stable, corporate (albeit monolithic) clients (title companies, bonding companies, credit unions, etc.) who represent no individual clients or do no litigation. They might screw something up but it gets settled out in the wash. If the client becomes disgruntled, the client fires the attorney; however the title company/credit union is not going to the State Bar absent theft of funds. The absence of litigation takes out the complaints from opposing parties that are groundless but still result in a letter requiring a response.
Been doing discipline panels for the bar for almost 10 years. I have never had a case referred by LCL. Most cases come from disgruntled clients. Most cases are dismissed immediately as having no merit. The cases where discipline is imposed deserve discipline. The Nevada Supreme Court reviews the discipline cases and has the ultimate say in what happens. If you don't like it the blame should be on the Court.
7:37-fair enough, but I believe that when an attorney is concerned or worried about confiding in a LCL attorney, they are generally not worried that the attorney they confide in turns around and reports the afflicted attorney.
I believe that even the critics of this LCL concept(and several have posted since last week) don't really worry about such a direct situation. The program would not have survived as Bar complaints originate from a source, such source is revealed to the accused, and if the source was ever an LCL lawyer, that would be a clear violation of their confidentiality requirement, and, as a practical matter, the word would get out and no one would ever seek help from the program.
So, no, even the most suspicious critics of LCL and its confidentiality commitment, presumably do not believe that the assisting attorney hangs up after entertaining a referral call from the lawyer in need of assistance, and then speed dials the Disciplinary Committee.
Instead, the concern is a lot more muddied and unclear, and generally consists of a belief that the grapevine works in strange ways .
The big issue for me is why are judges leaving in droves before their time and term is up. David Jones (Dept. 29) is just the lastest example. Is being a judge that bad? I am concerned that we are going to have the worst batch of inexperienced judges. All women from the DA or PD. Anybody can be either of those. It takes a good lawyer to be a successful civil practitioner, meet overhead and represent clients. Ten (10) years is not enough time–judges need 20 years in the trenches. Judges must be ambidextrous in civil and criminal.
Sam Lionel, RIP. I thought he would outlive us all.
https://www.dignitymemorial.com/obituaries/las-vegas-nv/samuel-lionel-11076059
Very impressive life and legacy. It was also very interesting to read that his step-granddaughter is named Rachel Uchitel. I wonder if it's the same Rachel Uchitel who was in the headlines back in 2010.
It is the same person
11:45-you describe very well what an optimum pool of judicial candidates should consist of–20+ years of practice from both sides of the aisle, all the administrative knowledge and headaches of operating a successful practice, attracting clients and referrals based on solid performance, etc.
Instead of people like that getting appointed, we wind up with a lot of people who profile well for political and other concerns, but who may not be great lawyers.
And yes, like you, it doesn't cut it for me if someone is a DA or PD for ten years, gets paid a set salary and endless flow of "clients"–either to defend or prosecute, but never having to run a practice, attract clients, etc.
And I do think experienced private practitioners are now wary of applying as the job security is non-existent. We have recently seen several attorneys with impressive careers who give up their practice to get appointed, and then a year or so later(sometimes less) they are beaten at the ballot box by someone with seemingly far less experience and accomplishments(wherein gender and other issues come into play).
And if you run a practice for over 20 years, and give it up to accept a judgeship, good luck re-building such practice if the voters soon toss you aside.
Now, all that may help explain why some worthy attorneys never seek a judgeship, but what explains judges who have not served that long, and who are relatively young, resigning their position? In some instances they may fear an election dynamic like the one just mentioned, and often they can avoid all that by accepting a tempting offer that may be on the table, such as an of counsel position with a prominent firm.
Perhaps the community should throw some names out there of our colleagues to encourage them to run, people both the plaintiff and defense bar can get behind. I think there are fantastic attorneys in town, but they don’t want to be subjected to anonymous ridicule and having cowards behind keyboards tearing them apart. How about: Ryan Krametbauer, AJ Sharp, Scott Lachman. Those would be some great candidates, they’ve been around and paid their dues.
Been around? All 5 digit bar numbers. I like 2 of the 3 of those names as people and as opposing counsel. However "paid their dues" is a little hyperbolic.
I must have missed where a four digit bar number was a requisite. All three of these men have had very respectable professional accomplishments and are well liked in the legal community. But of course, if you have better ideas, by all means.
4:27- 2 of the 3 are good men. But the issue with the current crop is not that they are women but that they lack the decades of legal experience that a Coffing/Aurbach/Allf/Crockett/Sturman/Jones brought to the bench. The bar number is an easy breakpoint for years of experience.
Nice. List your own name "disguised" with 2 other names to create a perception of authenticity.
Hasn't one of those names ran for multiple NV bar positions and lost? Probably not a good candidate.
Are any of those 3 names really any better than any of the judges currently on the bench? Other than being male, I'm not seeing much to distinguish them on.
Other than being male, what distinguishes any of the 3 names above from any of our current sitting judges? Doesn't seem like much.
Some decent candidates in 29 today.
3:33, this is sarcasm, right? Hard hard hard pass on all three.
Wait wait wait 12:10 with the legal news of the day if true.
Sam Lionel died at age 103.