So two judges voted so far. Interesting. I suspect they are family law judges – family law practitioners flood this blog. Not criticizing – wish more of my civil law colleagues would take time from their .2’s to shoot the sh$t on this blog.
We get some great stuff in here discussed and if Judges want to know what we think of them, anonymously, of course, then we are better for it. That’s all I got.
NJA has a blog. It would be great to report on what is being discussed there. Not sure of the defense lawyers have a blog. The criminal law practitioners have their NACJ blog but usually just technical stuff.
Said by someone who is not a lawyer, not a legal professional and not a law enforcement professional.
Guest
Anonymous
June 15, 2026 5:57 pm
Dear Department- When you served me with a Minute Order on June 15, 2026 claiming that the Minute Order was entered on August 14, 2025, I know you are not telling the truth and you know you are not telling the truth. Sure the Docket states that the decision was made on the day that you had it on your Chambers Calendar 10 months ago but since we have been checking your docket, you know that is deceptive at best, right?
Hell at least he made a ruling. Sure it was 10 months late and wrapped in deception. Many of us can’t even get a decision. I can only imagine the stress of his JEA and clerk fielding questions about when their order will be addressed.
Guest
Anonymous
June 16, 2026 8:40 am
Stop filing “Limited Appearances Pursuant to NRPC 1.2” in civil matters. Family Court allows unbundled representation; Civil Division does not. I have seen three separate judges have to tell practitioners once your toe is in the water that they are in.
This can’t be plaintiff’s personal injury contingent work. Who the heck files a “unbundled” lawyer notice into a civil matter? And what can kind of civil matter? Bizarre.
This happened in probate court last week. Separately, the way some family practitioners behave in civil court is sometimes pretty funny. I know the judges don’t always enforce the rules, but there *are* rules and I always laugh at the way some family practitioners wing it in civil court like the EDCR and NRCP aren’t a thing. It feels like high school debate, where the basis of the argument is a subjective sense of fairness, fueled by indignation.
So two judges voted so far. Interesting. I suspect they are family law judges – family law practitioners flood this blog. Not criticizing – wish more of my civil law colleagues would take time from their .2’s to shoot the sh$t on this blog.
Why is this post getting thumbs down? We don’t want to hear from civil law practitioners? Odd
Is there a way to IP block judges and non-attorneys from reading our blog
Sure. Step one: make a blog. ‘Cause this isn’t your blog, dawg, it’s Dawg’s.
Why would you want to block them?
We get some great stuff in here discussed and if Judges want to know what we think of them, anonymously, of course, then we are better for it. That’s all I got.
I believe the quality of the comments would substantially improve
NJA has a blog. It would be great to report on what is being discussed there. Not sure of the defense lawyers have a blog. The criminal law practitioners have their NACJ blog but usually just technical stuff.
where is the NJA blog
Njablog.com
That is not the web address for the NJA Blog. Comes up can’t be reached–Njablog.com
maybe start a zine that is delivered solely by carrier pigeon?
This is a blawg by the people, for the people!
Said by someone who is not a lawyer, not a legal professional and not a law enforcement professional.
Dear Department- When you served me with a Minute Order on June 15, 2026 claiming that the Minute Order was entered on August 14, 2025, I know you are not telling the truth and you know you are not telling the truth. Sure the Docket states that the decision was made on the day that you had it on your Chambers Calendar 10 months ago but since we have been checking your docket, you know that is deceptive at best, right?
You don’t even have to say the department number
Yes you do, please. Thanks.
Yes, say it loud.
My guess? this IS a RAEL thing
Hell at least he made a ruling. Sure it was 10 months late and wrapped in deception. Many of us can’t even get a decision. I can only imagine the stress of his JEA and clerk fielding questions about when their order will be addressed.
Stop filing “Limited Appearances Pursuant to NRPC 1.2” in civil matters. Family Court allows unbundled representation; Civil Division does not. I have seen three separate judges have to tell practitioners once your toe is in the water that they are in.
This can’t be plaintiff’s personal injury contingent work. Who the heck files a “unbundled” lawyer notice into a civil matter? And what can kind of civil matter? Bizarre.
This happened in probate court last week. Separately, the way some family practitioners behave in civil court is sometimes pretty funny. I know the judges don’t always enforce the rules, but there *are* rules and I always laugh at the way some family practitioners wing it in civil court like the EDCR and NRCP aren’t a thing. It feels like high school debate, where the basis of the argument is a subjective sense of fairness, fueled by indignation.