Brad Jerbic is preparing to leave his job at City Hall for “a still-unnamed national firm with a ‘huge’ Las Vegas office.” Anyone know where he will land? [RJ]
The US legal sector lost 64,000 jobs in March and April, losing in two months the number jobs lost in two years during the 2008 recession. [Bloomberg Law]
Here are some photos from the RJC if you haven’t been down there lately. [Eighthjdcourt blog]
One of the comments from yesterday says, “It looks like Letizia’s candidates are going after candidates for advertising sent out but Thomas’s people.” Here is the press release on the ethics complaints filed by Mickey Bohn and Jack Fleeman filed against Dan Gilliam and Margaret Pickard, respectively. [PRNewswire]
The only national firm with a large office I can think of is GT, but I wouldn't call any office in Las Vegas "huge".
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 5:37 pm
It involves Dan Gilliam and Pickard. There is an article about it. I could not find it yesterday.Please correct me if I am incorrect.
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 5:42 pm
With all due respect to Brad (who is a great guy), going from the City Attorney's office where everyday is casual day to the structure of a "national firm" at age 62 is a culture clash waiting to happen.
I'm sure his pension must be significant. I wouldn't want to put up with the "big firm" sociopaths and stuffed shirts at this point, but that's just me.
Don't ignore 11:01, that video explains it better and is much more articulate
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 5:52 pm
On Letizia Facebook posting of yesterday he offers details and specifics of how he intends to proceed with filing of this complaint.
These mailers raise a couple issues.
The joint mailers, by these candidates, featured their endorsements from various unions and organizations. But then rather than indicating the mailer was paid for by the organization, it indicated it was paid for by the election committees of each of the candidates listed on the endorsement mailers.
A safer, and more prudent approach, and how such matters were usually handled in the past, is that the candidates would give the money to their campaign consultant and/or directly to the organization featured in the mailer, and the mailer would then officially read that the organization paid for the mailer.
2. In an election a few years back judicial candidates received an admonishment for conducting a joint fund raiser. The theory was that if they present a joint fundraiser, then they are endorsing each other, and it is not permitted for judicial candidates to make public endorsements in other races. So, if the joint fundraiser is viewed as mutual public endorsements of each other, then even more so this joint endorsement mailer sent to thousands of homes.
So, I think Letizia's beef with all this has some apparent legitimacy, but I would hope he recognizes that as a practical matter nothing will happen–perhaps a news column or two, but no real ethical repercussions.
The commission that dealt specifically with issues involving judicial elections(which was the commission that weighed in on that joint fundraise issue) is no longer involved with discipline disputes, but now only offers advisory opinions. So, there won't be any reprimands or punishments coming form that de-fanged commission.
Which kind of leaves Letizia and his candidates to file complaints with the Sate Bar Discipline Section. And the State Bar has seldom involved itself in these election disputes between judicial candidates. The Bar will be on you like white on rice if your Trust account is temporarily off by $3.00, but they don't involve themselves in back-biting between candidates and candidates accusing each other of unethical election practices.
I suppose they could get involved if something, election-wise, was really extreme or shocking, but I'm sorry, this dispute will not rise to that level.
The State Bar does not govern discipline of judicial candidate or judges. Candidates fall under and are bound by the same Canons judges are, the Nevada Revised Code of Judicial Conduct. The Discipline Commission and Judicial Ethics Commission are both housed under the umbrella of the Nevada Judicial Commission. A complaint was filed by Bohn and Fleeman with the Judicial Discipline Commission. The complaint will be triaged and an initial determination will be made on if and how to proceed. Ethics questions sent to the Judicial Ethics Commission, conversely, are reviewed in the order received. Generally, in both cases, there is quite a bit of lag time between inquiry/complaint and any response – unless, of course, you happen to be female, using salty language and wearing fancy high heels. The latter really seems to get Commission Director Paul Deyhle's goat.
I think there is a bit more to the complaint. One of the mailers at issue said that the candidates were endorsed by the "Nevada Republican Club" if true, that is another violation.
11:06 is correct, even a candidate who is not yet elected judge can be disciplined.
As 10:52 indicates I'm not sure how effective it will all be, and 11:06 would tend to agree with that since,for starters, it would not come to hearing till after the election.
Bohn and Fleeman should be proceeding this way because they truly believe the purported violations actually hurt their campaigns if they do not hit back. Instead, if either are doing this merely for the "principle of the matter" that is naive and counter-productive.
Are they in fact proceeding because they are allowing themselves to be manipulated as the fall guys for this "noble cause" while the other candidates, who have a grievance based on this mailer, are sitting it out?
11:06 here. Judicial candidates and judges are explicitly prohibited from stating party affiliation. Candidates and judges are prohibited, for example, from riding on parade float sponsored by a political party (JE 06-016 opinion) or from participating in political clubs or central committees (JE 07-008 opinion). These are just a few examples. The issue with the Republican Club mailer is that is was paid for by each of the candidates on the mailer rather than the Club itself. I suspect other candidates will be filing similar complaints. Of the candidates, Pickard has the most to lose as she is an employee of the District Court (county) and is at will.
Yes, discipline complaints are screened by staff at the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline. Some are determined appropriate for investigation, some are not. After investigation, the Committee members will determine if a public and formal complaint should be filed. Prior to the filing of a Complaint, the party against whom the complaint is filed has a mandatory obligation to respond. Failure to respond can result in additional discipline and more charges. This latter issue was the subject of Judges Tobiasson and Chelini's appeal against the Commission. They were successful in their appeal which may have changed some of the procedures used by the Commission.
As 10:52 mentions, in the past, when there have been these mailers from organizations endorsing several candidates, the candidates would give the money to their campaign manager and/or the organization sending the mailer, and the mailer would then indicate it is paid for the the organization sending the mailer.
But in this instance the mailers indicate they are all paid for by the various endorsed candidates. That will attract attention. And everyone should have known better because a few years back candidates were reprimanded for participating in a joint fund raise.
So, just like the joint fundraiser was viewed as the candidates mutually endorsing each other, this mailer(sent to tens of thousands of homes) definitely would appear to be the candidates publicly endorsing each other, at least as such concept is defined by the commission.
I think a candidate has the right to say they were endorsed by the "Nevada Republican Club" if the candidate was, in fact, endorsed by that private organization. To suggest that one cannot mention the words "Republican" or "Democrat" is absurd.
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 5:56 pm
Gotta love the spelling mistake in the PR piece. People need to realize that spell check doesn't catch errors in all-caps words. That's why small caps are my friend in briefs.
Spell check (Microsoft Word anyway) can be set to catch all-caps. Open the File drop down menu, select the Proofing options, and uncheck the option to "Ignore words in UPPERCASE".
Identically, if anyone knows how to get the Word spell-check function to catch misspellings in footnotes, I'd appreciate it if you would share that information.
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 9:10 pm
The RJC photos reminded me of how much I hate that place. Let's hope the shutdown goes on until I retire. I hear the virus mutates, so better safe than sorry. #Shutdownforever
Guest
Anonymous
May 19, 2020 10:24 pm
The word around Las Vegas City Hall is that the city council is going to replace Brad Jerbic with a low level 6 year lawyer in their City Attorney's Office. I don't know him, but he must be related to Harry Reid in order to beat out the attorneys at the city with two decades more experience than him. In the alternative, maybe he's spent the past two months licking hand railings in downtown area buildings to show his dedication to Mayor Goodman.
I like John even though some of the stuff he posts on Facebook is ridiculous. But, then again, it's usually entertaining and never actually malicious. I'm glad he's in Las Vegas and I'm glad he's in my FB feed. More importantly, he's a solid attorney.
Bryan Scott as run that office for decades and put in his time. No one, and I mean NO one, should get that post except him. He is smart, hard-working and effective.
I had to research the Führer's orders, and now I am so depressed. We are barely better than Michigan and California. Great time to be a judgment debtor though.
Guest
Anonymous
May 20, 2020 1:10 am
Anybody have an idea as to a "reopening schedule" for various government entities?
Why would government hurry to reopen? Employees are drawing a paycheck and serving the pubic (actually working, not lip service) is always the very last consideration in government operating decisions.
The only national firm with a large office I can think of is GT, but I wouldn't call any office in Las Vegas "huge".
It involves Dan Gilliam and Pickard. There is an article about it. I could not find it yesterday.Please correct me if I am incorrect.
With all due respect to Brad (who is a great guy), going from the City Attorney's office where everyday is casual day to the structure of a "national firm" at age 62 is a culture clash waiting to happen.
I'm sure his pension must be significant. I wouldn't want to put up with the "big firm" sociopaths and stuffed shirts at this point, but that's just me.
https://www.twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1262781561629532161
Sorry, broken link. Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ4i3lQM5lg
10:50 here, ignore 11:01.
I got this ad this morning and gave it a TRUE WTH. Sure looked like a legitimate story from the RJ until I opened it up. Shameful from the shameless.
Don't ignore 11:01, that video explains it better and is much more articulate
On Letizia Facebook posting of yesterday he offers details and specifics of how he intends to proceed with filing of this complaint.
These mailers raise a couple issues.
The joint mailers, by these candidates, featured their endorsements from various unions and organizations. But then rather than indicating the mailer was paid for by the organization, it indicated it was paid for by the election committees of each of the candidates listed on the endorsement mailers.
A safer, and more prudent approach, and how such matters were usually handled in the past, is that the candidates would give the money to their campaign consultant and/or directly to the organization featured in the mailer, and the mailer would then officially read that the organization paid for the mailer.
2. In an election a few years back judicial candidates received an admonishment for conducting a joint fund raiser. The theory was that if they present a joint fundraiser, then they are endorsing each other, and it is not permitted for judicial candidates to make public endorsements in other races. So, if the joint fundraiser is viewed as mutual public endorsements of each other, then even more so this joint endorsement mailer sent to thousands of homes.
So, I think Letizia's beef with all this has some apparent legitimacy, but I would hope he recognizes that as a practical matter nothing will happen–perhaps a news column or two, but no real ethical repercussions.
The commission that dealt specifically with issues involving judicial elections(which was the commission that weighed in on that joint fundraise issue) is no longer involved with discipline disputes, but now only offers advisory opinions. So, there won't be any reprimands or punishments coming form that de-fanged commission.
Which kind of leaves Letizia and his candidates to file complaints with the Sate Bar Discipline Section. And the State Bar has seldom involved itself in these election disputes between judicial candidates. The Bar will be on you like white on rice if your Trust account is temporarily off by $3.00, but they don't involve themselves in back-biting between candidates and candidates accusing each other of unethical election practices.
I suppose they could get involved if something, election-wise, was really extreme or shocking, but I'm sorry, this dispute will not rise to that level.
The State Bar does not govern discipline of judicial candidate or judges. Candidates fall under and are bound by the same Canons judges are, the Nevada Revised Code of Judicial Conduct. The Discipline Commission and Judicial Ethics Commission are both housed under the umbrella of the Nevada Judicial Commission. A complaint was filed by Bohn and Fleeman with the Judicial Discipline Commission. The complaint will be triaged and an initial determination will be made on if and how to proceed. Ethics questions sent to the Judicial Ethics Commission, conversely, are reviewed in the order received. Generally, in both cases, there is quite a bit of lag time between inquiry/complaint and any response – unless, of course, you happen to be female, using salty language and wearing fancy high heels. The latter really seems to get Commission Director Paul Deyhle's goat.
I think there is a bit more to the complaint. One of the mailers at issue said that the candidates were endorsed by the "Nevada Republican Club" if true, that is another violation.
Why? The NRC is a private club. It’s not the Nevada Republican Party, the GOP, the RNC, etc.
11:06 is correct, even a candidate who is not yet elected judge can be disciplined.
As 10:52 indicates I'm not sure how effective it will all be, and 11:06 would tend to agree with that since,for starters, it would not come to hearing till after the election.
Bohn and Fleeman should be proceeding this way because they truly believe the purported violations actually hurt their campaigns if they do not hit back. Instead, if either are doing this merely for the "principle of the matter" that is naive and counter-productive.
Are they in fact proceeding because they are allowing themselves to be manipulated as the fall guys for this "noble cause" while the other candidates, who have a grievance based on this mailer, are sitting it out?
11:06 here. Judicial candidates and judges are explicitly prohibited from stating party affiliation. Candidates and judges are prohibited, for example, from riding on parade float sponsored by a political party (JE 06-016 opinion) or from participating in political clubs or central committees (JE 07-008 opinion). These are just a few examples. The issue with the Republican Club mailer is that is was paid for by each of the candidates on the mailer rather than the Club itself. I suspect other candidates will be filing similar complaints. Of the candidates, Pickard has the most to lose as she is an employee of the District Court (county) and is at will.
Do judicial complaints get screened before going to committee? Just curious.
The canon at issue (4.1) covers "political organizations" and is not limited to the actual party.
Yes, discipline complaints are screened by staff at the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline. Some are determined appropriate for investigation, some are not. After investigation, the Committee members will determine if a public and formal complaint should be filed. Prior to the filing of a Complaint, the party against whom the complaint is filed has a mandatory obligation to respond. Failure to respond can result in additional discipline and more charges. This latter issue was the subject of Judges Tobiasson and Chelini's appeal against the Commission. They were successful in their appeal which may have changed some of the procedures used by the Commission.
So do all complaints go to committee or are they presecreenef before that?
As 10:52 mentions, in the past, when there have been these mailers from organizations endorsing several candidates, the candidates would give the money to their campaign manager and/or the organization sending the mailer, and the mailer would then indicate it is paid for the the organization sending the mailer.
But in this instance the mailers indicate they are all paid for by the various endorsed candidates. That will attract attention. And everyone should have known better because a few years back candidates were reprimanded for participating in a joint fund raise.
So, just like the joint fundraiser was viewed as the candidates mutually endorsing each other, this mailer(sent to tens of thousands of homes) definitely would appear to be the candidates publicly endorsing each other, at least as such concept is defined by the commission.
The rules permit slate mailers amongst groups of candidates.
I think a candidate has the right to say they were endorsed by the "Nevada Republican Club" if the candidate was, in fact, endorsed by that private organization. To suggest that one cannot mention the words "Republican" or "Democrat" is absurd.
Gotta love the spelling mistake in the PR piece. People need to realize that spell check doesn't catch errors in all-caps words. That's why small caps are my friend in briefs.
Spell check (Microsoft Word anyway) can be set to catch all-caps. Open the File drop down menu, select the Proofing options, and uncheck the option to "Ignore words in UPPERCASE".
Identically, if anyone knows how to get the Word spell-check function to catch misspellings in footnotes, I'd appreciate it if you would share that information.
The RJC photos reminded me of how much I hate that place. Let's hope the shutdown goes on until I retire. I hear the virus mutates, so better safe than sorry. #Shutdownforever
The word around Las Vegas City Hall is that the city council is going to replace Brad Jerbic with a low level 6 year lawyer in their City Attorney's Office. I don't know him, but he must be related to Harry Reid in order to beat out the attorneys at the city with two decades more experience than him. In the alternative, maybe he's spent the past two months licking hand railings in downtown area buildings to show his dedication to Mayor Goodman.
John Curtas is in that office. Surprised someone as media friendly as John would not be the pick.
I like John even though some of the stuff he posts on Facebook is ridiculous. But, then again, it's usually entertaining and never actually malicious. I'm glad he's in Las Vegas and I'm glad he's in my FB feed. More importantly, he's a solid attorney.
Bryan Scott as run that office for decades and put in his time. No one, and I mean NO one, should get that post except him. He is smart, hard-working and effective.
He might not want the gig. I wouldn't.
Ridiculous
I had to research the Führer's orders, and now I am so depressed. We are barely better than Michigan and California. Great time to be a judgment debtor though.
Anybody have an idea as to a "reopening schedule" for various government entities?
Why would government hurry to reopen? Employees are drawing a paycheck and serving the pubic (actually working, not lip service) is always the very last consideration in government operating decisions.
Correct. No one cares about us.
Mickey Bohn should be disciplined for those God awful videos with his wife. Awful.
I don't understand the purpose of his wife in the videos. She doesn't add much.
Brad Jerbic is going to a firm where his hairstyle will be more appreciated.