When I saw the title I thought it was re the state bar. As I’m licensed in 4 states I’m mildly qualified to be this salty in the morning.
Guest
Anonymous
March 26, 2025 10:21 am
There has been quite a bit of anecdotal discussion about how dead Super Bowl weekend and March Madness have been on the Strip. It could be that widespread legalized sports betting is the culprit. However, I think it’s probably a combination of the Strip nickel and diming tourists with bullshit fees, consumers becoming cautious with their money in the face of economic uncertainty and tourists staying away from the United States. If true, and severe enough, it will ripple over to the legal industry. Businesses are less likely to fund litigation in an economic downturn, although the downturn itself does create work. I know my family is tightening our belt to be safe.
Las Vegas used to have inexpensive buffets and restaurants with nice but reasonably- priced hotel rooms. Now, the buffets, if they exist, are at east $65 a head and the resort fees are ridiculous.
It was too expensive for anybody but the top 10% a decade ago. Make that the top 2% now. Parking, food, higher limits to play, rooms, resort fees. It’s gotten ridiculous.
I definitely think it is the nickel and diming to a large extent.
That noted, it’s also the ridiculous price surging for these events as well. If we remember the initial F1 race, most of the hotels were surging prices to like 500% of their normal amount if not more. Then at the end everyone was scrambling because rooms weren’t filled and to make matters worse they then had to do damage control with those customers that decided to pay the blown up prices.
Third, there is an analytic aspect to the business model that makes sense in creating profit with efficiency, but i believe at some point it will be like drawing blood from a stone as people Las Vegas gains steam with the reputation of being unaffordable.
I remember 49 cent breakfast at the Showboat after midnight. Walking in to no cover shows.
People came to LV for gambling and some inexpensive entertainment.
I have thought for some time that the casino industry has been choking the goose that laid the golden egg. Charge for parking?
A couple years ago I heard that legalizing nationwide betting had increased Vegas’s sportsbook revenue as well. The explanation was that instead of getting a lot of money from a small group of people who really loved betting, the books could now get a small amount of money from the huge group of people who had gotten used to betting at home and wanted to do it while in Vegas.
It’s possible that’s no longer the case, but I think it’s more likely some combination of economic uncertainty and prices outrunning demand.
People are willing to pay a premium to come to vegas. It has been that way for a long time. Pretty much sense the mirage opened and vegas started transforming from crappy and cheap to luxury resorts. However, the expectation was that you pay a premium for a premium experience. In Vegas, you were treated like a king or Queen, and you paid for it. People are willing to do that. However, now with these companies drowning in foolish debt and feeling the pressure to deliver ever increasing returns they are cutting back on the quality of the experience. So now you have to pay more for less. Who wants to do that? People are willing to spend a lot for a legendary weekend. Now they come here and have to spend a lot for a crappy weekend. This video sums it up pretty well haha
Met someone for lunch on the Strip a few months ago. Cost something like fifty bucks or a little more to valet the car for not quite two hours. Insane. Not worth it. I realize I’m probably not the target demographic, but screw that.
“An Uber-funded PAC launched a billboard and digital advertising campaign last month to urge lawmakers to stand up to “greedy lawyers,” and a bill from Sen. Ira Hansen (R-Sparks) was introduced that essentially mirrored the proposed ballot initiative, though it’s not expected to progress in the Legislature.”
Ira Hansen is a hot headed, dimwitted reactionary that is easily manipulated to carry the water for wealthy corporations and people who would never give him the time of day if he weren’t a state senator. I seriously doubt Hansen is even aware how dramatically his shilling proposal would limit access to justice outside of personal injury matters. He probably thinks $1M verdicts against McDonalds for spilt hot coffee are how we are all making a living and serving the community.
A full decade into the Trump era and there are people who still think formal statements from established institutions have any relevancy or impact. The ABA is both right and irrelevant. If you’re irrelevant, it doesn’t matter if you’re right.
This is so ridiculous. The “rule of law” in your context, insinuates that once a judge rules, there is no extra-judicial recourse (only an appeal), if he is wrong or biased or refuses to interpret the law as written and is not making a good faith attempt to change the law, because he believes that it is unconstitutional.
Judges are not the all powerful deity you want them to be in this situation. Stop pretending. If a judge, any judge supported the administrations actions, you would absolutely be calling for their impeachment.
No I wouldn’t. If that was my approach, I would have been calling for Aileen Cannon’s impeachment years ago. But I guess you know more than Chief Justice Roberts, eh?
F off, cult member/traitor.
Guest
Anonymous
March 26, 2025 12:22 pm
PI attorney here: At first glance, the ride-share compromise is sickeningly cynical from both sides.
Practical impact: The injured person gets screwed. Lawyers keep their fees (as we should!) and ride-share insurance gets a lower minimum.
Old system limit outcome with 40% fees = 900K to injured person before costs/meds
New system limit outcome with 40% fees – 600K to injured person before costs/meds
“You’re injured for life, here’s 6 years’ salary, good luck!” (lets not get bogged down in a debate about 100K doesn’t equal a years’ salary)
Want to start fixing the Nevada tort system: 1) Get rid of the collateral source rule and/or really make medical providers prove reasonable fee; 2) Get rid and/or rein in the medical experts, i.e. this person needs lifetime psych/counseling even though they never had any psych/counseling to date and the incident was 5, heck 10 years ago (ya’ll know that P.o.S. oldest profession “expert”); 3) Get rid and/or rein in the experts re the cost of future care. Yeah, I am a salty as f defense lawyer, but I also believe that the legitimately injured should receive full compensation. STOP THE LEGAL BLACKMAIL.
Uber does not care about public policy, they only want to limit their expense and liability. NJA wants to maximize profits, which does better align with the public’s interests than Uber, albeit imperfectly.
LOL! This is comical – as demonstrated by OP’s comment, NJA cares more about plaintiffs’ lawyers fees than an injured plaintiff…
The NJA agreed to limit an injured’s policy-limits recovery by $300k. This would, in turn, only limit the attorneys’ fee by $200k under a 40% contingency fee.
If the NJA cared about the injureds as much as their own self-interests, they would have AT LEAST crafted some language which required a lawyer to never take more than the client or incorporated a provision to ensure the reduction was split evenly.
The NJA members would rather ruin society than make less money, so they are pretty much on the same level as people have been for all of human history.
12:36, what is interesting is that you dont talk about how (1) many cases go to litigation because insurance adjusters refuse to pay 25k or 50k limits and instead repeatedly give below meds offers dispute clear liability; (2) defense experts say EVERY case is a simple sprain strain; and (3)defense disputes liability throughout litigation until the eve of trial then stipulates only to focus on meds.
How about get rid of all the games? I get it if there is a genuine dispute over valuation, but everything is straight BS and essentially forces the claimant to be a plaintiff.
Like i tell my clients every time: “If insurance companies held up their end of their bargain i wouldn’t have a job.”
I’ll freely admit that insurance adjusters don’t resolve cases that could and should be resolved without significant fees and costs being incurred. By the same token you need to admit that plaintiffs and their attorneys also don’t resolve cases that could and should be resolved. Part of that problem is the medical expense issue. Disagree every defense expert says it’s always a sprain. Most cases usually have a liability component. Defense plays games, plaintiffs play games. There are too many issues and to fix the PROBLEM. However, I think something can and should be done about the medical expense issue.
What is wrong with medical expenses? A hospital charges what it charges. Doctors charge what they charge. If everyone had accessible health insurance then we wouldn’t have this issue. Why should an insurance company get a discount because the plaintiff pays for health insurance that also gets subrogation?
I guess the courts will just continue to perpetrate the fraud on juries, and on the citizenry. The medical expense damage component is just a tariff exacted on the citizenry via higher insurance premiums.
It is funny hearing people say, “this should happen or they should have negotiated this.” Legislation doesn’t work this way. Uber wanted to get rid of vicarious liability and lower coverage. Do you think they would negotiate a deal to have lawyers take less money and still allow vicarious liability? Stop being stupid. This was not about attorney fees.
When I saw the title I thought it was re the state bar. As I’m licensed in 4 states I’m mildly qualified to be this salty in the morning.
There has been quite a bit of anecdotal discussion about how dead Super Bowl weekend and March Madness have been on the Strip. It could be that widespread legalized sports betting is the culprit. However, I think it’s probably a combination of the Strip nickel and diming tourists with bullshit fees, consumers becoming cautious with their money in the face of economic uncertainty and tourists staying away from the United States. If true, and severe enough, it will ripple over to the legal industry. Businesses are less likely to fund litigation in an economic downturn, although the downturn itself does create work. I know my family is tightening our belt to be safe.
Las Vegas used to have inexpensive buffets and restaurants with nice but reasonably- priced hotel rooms. Now, the buffets, if they exist, are at east $65 a head and the resort fees are ridiculous.
It was too expensive for anybody but the top 10% a decade ago. Make that the top 2% now. Parking, food, higher limits to play, rooms, resort fees. It’s gotten ridiculous.
Not to mention triple zero roulette.
Could I interest you in some 6:5 blackjack with stingy drink vouchers?
I definitely think it is the nickel and diming to a large extent.
That noted, it’s also the ridiculous price surging for these events as well. If we remember the initial F1 race, most of the hotels were surging prices to like 500% of their normal amount if not more. Then at the end everyone was scrambling because rooms weren’t filled and to make matters worse they then had to do damage control with those customers that decided to pay the blown up prices.
Third, there is an analytic aspect to the business model that makes sense in creating profit with efficiency, but i believe at some point it will be like drawing blood from a stone as people Las Vegas gains steam with the reputation of being unaffordable.
F1 has been nothing but a scourge on this town. Fuck those people.
I remember 49 cent breakfast at the Showboat after midnight. Walking in to no cover shows.
People came to LV for gambling and some inexpensive entertainment.
I have thought for some time that the casino industry has been choking the goose that laid the golden egg. Charge for parking?
I remember the good old days when you could find someone to economically choke your Golden Goose in this town
A couple years ago I heard that legalizing nationwide betting had increased Vegas’s sportsbook revenue as well. The explanation was that instead of getting a lot of money from a small group of people who really loved betting, the books could now get a small amount of money from the huge group of people who had gotten used to betting at home and wanted to do it while in Vegas.
It’s possible that’s no longer the case, but I think it’s more likely some combination of economic uncertainty and prices outrunning demand.
People are willing to pay a premium to come to vegas. It has been that way for a long time. Pretty much sense the mirage opened and vegas started transforming from crappy and cheap to luxury resorts. However, the expectation was that you pay a premium for a premium experience. In Vegas, you were treated like a king or Queen, and you paid for it. People are willing to do that. However, now with these companies drowning in foolish debt and feeling the pressure to deliver ever increasing returns they are cutting back on the quality of the experience. So now you have to pay more for less. Who wants to do that? People are willing to spend a lot for a legendary weekend. Now they come here and have to spend a lot for a crappy weekend. This video sums it up pretty well haha
https://youtube.com/shorts/9rT5qbMIDcM?feature=shared
“Luxury resorts” Good one. 😂 👊🏼🇺🇸🔥
Met someone for lunch on the Strip a few months ago. Cost something like fifty bucks or a little more to valet the car for not quite two hours. Insane. Not worth it. I realize I’m probably not the target demographic, but screw that.
Yet profits and revenue keeps breaking records so maybe the nickel and diming is working.
It works, until it doesn’t. Nevada’s never been known for boom-and-bust economic cycles, right?
Things that cannot go on forever, won’t.
“An Uber-funded PAC launched a billboard and digital advertising campaign last month to urge lawmakers to stand up to “greedy lawyers,” and a bill from Sen. Ira Hansen (R-Sparks) was introduced that essentially mirrored the proposed ballot initiative, though it’s not expected to progress in the Legislature.”
Ira Hansen is a hot headed, dimwitted reactionary that is easily manipulated to carry the water for wealthy corporations and people who would never give him the time of day if he weren’t a state senator. I seriously doubt Hansen is even aware how dramatically his shilling proposal would limit access to justice outside of personal injury matters. He probably thinks $1M verdicts against McDonalds for spilt hot coffee are how we are all making a living and serving the community.
No no the people of Sparks are crying out to limit contingency fees. I hear them talking about it every time I walk through Victorian Square.
If you could convince them that limiting contingency fees is a way to “own the libs” they absolutely would riot in Victorian Square for it.
Rubes and maroons.
One man’s “rubes and maroons” are another man’s True American Patriots.
That other man is also a rube and maroon.
Isn’t he about termed out, at long last? I remember him carrying the water for builders and insurance companies back during the CD heyday.
ABA Statement in support of the Rule of Law Today joined in by 50 state and local bars. Should Nevada Bar add their support?
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/03/bar-organizations-statement-in-support-of-rule-of-law/?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=&promo=&RefId=&utm_id=988866&sfmc_id=45281655
The ABA is an irrelevant joke.
A full decade into the Trump era and there are people who still think formal statements from established institutions have any relevancy or impact. The ABA is both right and irrelevant. If you’re irrelevant, it doesn’t matter if you’re right.
The Trump era? Half of which was overseen by someone decidedly NOT Trump.
GMAFB!
I do however, agree with the irrelevancy of the ABA.
Yes, the NV Bar absolutely should.
Why?
Why shouldn’t a bar association, any bar association in the U.S., support the Rule of Law?
Because it will have ZERO impact, or worse, cause harm??!??! Hello?
Supporting the Rule of Law will cause harm?
This is so ridiculous. The “rule of law” in your context, insinuates that once a judge rules, there is no extra-judicial recourse (only an appeal), if he is wrong or biased or refuses to interpret the law as written and is not making a good faith attempt to change the law, because he believes that it is unconstitutional.
Judges are not the all powerful deity you want them to be in this situation. Stop pretending. If a judge, any judge supported the administrations actions, you would absolutely be calling for their impeachment.
No I wouldn’t. If that was my approach, I would have been calling for Aileen Cannon’s impeachment years ago. But I guess you know more than Chief Justice Roberts, eh?
F off, cult member/traitor.
PI attorney here: At first glance, the ride-share compromise is sickeningly cynical from both sides.
Practical impact: The injured person gets screwed. Lawyers keep their fees (as we should!) and ride-share insurance gets a lower minimum.
Old system limit outcome with 40% fees = 900K to injured person before costs/meds
New system limit outcome with 40% fees – 600K to injured person before costs/meds
“You’re injured for life, here’s 6 years’ salary, good luck!” (lets not get bogged down in a debate about 100K doesn’t equal a years’ salary)
Want to start fixing the Nevada tort system: 1) Get rid of the collateral source rule and/or really make medical providers prove reasonable fee; 2) Get rid and/or rein in the medical experts, i.e. this person needs lifetime psych/counseling even though they never had any psych/counseling to date and the incident was 5, heck 10 years ago (ya’ll know that P.o.S. oldest profession “expert”); 3) Get rid and/or rein in the experts re the cost of future care. Yeah, I am a salty as f defense lawyer, but I also believe that the legitimately injured should receive full compensation. STOP THE LEGAL BLACKMAIL.
Uber does not care about public policy, they only want to limit their expense and liability. NJA wants to maximize profits, which does better align with the public’s interests than Uber, albeit imperfectly.
The NJA is about getting justice for the injured, it’s not about the money.
LOL! This is comical – as demonstrated by OP’s comment, NJA cares more about plaintiffs’ lawyers fees than an injured plaintiff…
The NJA agreed to limit an injured’s policy-limits recovery by $300k. This would, in turn, only limit the attorneys’ fee by $200k under a 40% contingency fee.
If the NJA cared about the injureds as much as their own self-interests, they would have AT LEAST crafted some language which required a lawyer to never take more than the client or incorporated a provision to ensure the reduction was split evenly.
The NJA members would rather ruin society than make less money, so they are pretty much on the same level as people have been for all of human history.
12:36, what is interesting is that you dont talk about how (1) many cases go to litigation because insurance adjusters refuse to pay 25k or 50k limits and instead repeatedly give below meds offers dispute clear liability; (2) defense experts say EVERY case is a simple sprain strain; and (3)defense disputes liability throughout litigation until the eve of trial then stipulates only to focus on meds.
How about get rid of all the games? I get it if there is a genuine dispute over valuation, but everything is straight BS and essentially forces the claimant to be a plaintiff.
Like i tell my clients every time: “If insurance companies held up their end of their bargain i wouldn’t have a job.”
I’ll freely admit that insurance adjusters don’t resolve cases that could and should be resolved without significant fees and costs being incurred. By the same token you need to admit that plaintiffs and their attorneys also don’t resolve cases that could and should be resolved. Part of that problem is the medical expense issue. Disagree every defense expert says it’s always a sprain. Most cases usually have a liability component. Defense plays games, plaintiffs play games. There are too many issues and to fix the PROBLEM. However, I think something can and should be done about the medical expense issue.
What is wrong with medical expenses? A hospital charges what it charges. Doctors charge what they charge. If everyone had accessible health insurance then we wouldn’t have this issue. Why should an insurance company get a discount because the plaintiff pays for health insurance that also gets subrogation?
unless there is universal healthcare/ insurance, we will always have an issue regarding free market healthcare.
Collateral source rule is never going away. Cope harder.
I guess the courts will just continue to perpetrate the fraud on juries, and on the citizenry. The medical expense damage component is just a tariff exacted on the citizenry via higher insurance premiums.
How about be a good lawyer and just win the case if you are so much in the right. It is not blackmail if you didn’t do anything wrong.
It is funny hearing people say, “this should happen or they should have negotiated this.” Legislation doesn’t work this way. Uber wanted to get rid of vicarious liability and lower coverage. Do you think they would negotiate a deal to have lawyers take less money and still allow vicarious liability? Stop being stupid. This was not about attorney fees.