- Quickdraw McLaw
- 46 Comments
- 142 Views
- Judge Linda Bell’s order granted Sheriff Joe Lombardo’s request to release hundreds of inmates due to COVID-19. [TNI]
- OSHA complaints reveal worker concerns. [TNI]
- Wynn Resorts has a plan for opening (some) things back up by Memorial Day. [TNI]
- Applications for domestic violence temporary protective orders are available online. [8NewsNow]
- We’re now over a month into dealing with this unique situation and the resulting orders from the Court. Is everything in the system working for you right now? Any suggestions your have to improve it? Would you do anything different during a second wave?
Re: "Unique situation"
I work with individual clients. We are trying some telephonic intakes and video conferencing. Both suck compared to meeting person to person. Volume is down. As an observation, most people are putting off seeking legal assistance.
In my experience, legal inquiries are up. Lots of people have questions and want assistance. People willing to pay for legal assistance is down. The panic is causing people angst but not enough that they are willing to retain legal services.
Something that I'd like to know – what areas of practice are you in, how long you've been working in that area of law, and are your inquiries going up or down during this?
I've been doing consumer bankruptcy for ~15 years (~3 attorneys in office) and we're probably at half our usual calls per day.
I believe the so-called "second wave" of infections coming from a rush to end the stay-at-home will far surpass the initial infections and rate of transmission. IMHO we should stay at home and do this slowly and correctly and not have an up and down "waves." Our legal system can better handle a downturn and slow increase better than "waves" IMO. I base my opinion on my observations that the Courts are slow to implement and implementing a system once will work better than doing it multiple times when not many know the status as things change often. Just my thoughts. Hope everyone is having a great day and staying safe. Old retired lawyer in St. George – SGWW
Won't there be waves either way? Wasn't the whole point of the lock down to "flatten the curve" to make it so that the first wave didn't overwhelm hospitals? If so, it seems like we should slowly unleash second, third, fourth, etc. waves when hospital capacity figures suggest hospitals can accommodate new waves.
I agree with 12:23. There's no good scenario here. I am completely and totally for the gradual re-opening of everything but realize there will be new waves of infection. But at the same time, if we keep society closed much longer, shit is only going to get worse.
On the good news front, there are several studies/hospitals that have been using Remdesivir on COVID-19 patients, and it has been working great. However, it's ONLY been used on hospital patients that are crashing fast – but for those individuals, it seems to be working great. One of the hospitals that used it was in France, and it was used on 115 individuals – 113 of them survived, with only 2 deaths. Keep in mind that this is the small subset of the population that likely would have a lot more deaths, but for the administration of this drug.
I agree with the old fella in New York. While I don't wish ill-will on anyone, I think it's worth noting that this may be the first time that science deniers face immediate and personal consequences for their beliefs. Of course, they will not face those consequences in isolation. We all suffer because of the increased spread and delayed reopening.
My practice has been fine so far. I have more work than I can handle and keep originating new work from my network which has been very good to me. I have about a year of savings. I feel fortunate that I do not feel existential economic anxiety so far.
11:24 here. I meant St. George, not New York. And by the way, Old Fella, you need to be careful up there. You're surrounded by dumb asses that aren't taking this seriously. I have family in St. George and I fear for their safety if there is a major outbreak there because of all the morons running around beating their chests about freedom.
11:26 – Old Guy again – you are correct and I have noticed that behavior up here. Hope your family remains safe.
At 11:24 – this isn't about us "dumb asses" that aren't taking this seriously. This is about governmental over reach. While some people are "at-risk" for serious issues due to COVID-19, the majority of the population can whether the storm quite well. We complied with the lockdown for already 1 month. At some point, the economy needs to reopen and people need to get back to work. Those that feel they may be at risk, stay home. Let those of us that can go back to work, do so. There's a point where you need to weigh the risk to our way of life (i.e. the many) to the safety of the weak (the few). It's called natural selection.
Has the lockdown really been helpful? The virus is still out there; still just as virulent as it was in February. My take is that this virus is akin to measles, in that its dangerous until herd immunity is achieved, somewhere around 80% of the population must have been infected.
12:05 PM,
11:24 here. I want to reopen. We can't, though, because there's not enough tests to trace infections or keep the spread in check. You can thank many rudderless leaders for that, but at the top of the list is Donald J. Trump. Who knew that a TV personality would flounder in a national crisis? This is why professional baseball leagues in Tawain and South Korea are playing games but here in the U.S. there is no foreseeable path forward for MLB. So yes, I agree with you that it isn't fair that we all have to stay in. Let's get testing in place like Germany has so we can get back to life (somewhat) as normal. The solution isn't to gather a bunch of angry high school drop outs waiving the flag at a protest. It's to get testing in place.
To the extent you disagree with me, I invite you to move to St. George where you can live with a bunch of people who think this is overblown hype perpetuated by the liberal media to make Donald Trump look bad. Good luck with that.
at 11:24, this is 12:05 p.m. I'd like to share a quote from a very wise person who identified as a man. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." You have chosen to give up your liberty in exchange for temporary safety. Therefore, you deserve neither liberty nor safety. I, on the other hand, have chosen to rise up against tyranny. History shall judge me in a better light than you.
Supposed historians should stop taking the Franklin quote out of context: https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-safety-quote-lost-its-context-in-21st-century
Ahhh, the old lost in context of 21st Century life hoax. You're one of those people that says the Framers could not possibly have foreseen the kind of firepower we have now, therefore anything greater than a musket or flintlock pistol must be banned.
Public health regulations in response to a pandemic have little to do with the Second Amendment; Franklin's quote has even less to do with the COVID-19 pandemic.
2:13 if that's what you got from the article you might want to take a second crack at it.
I don't listen to NPR or watch MSLSD or read the NY Slimes or Washington Compost, etc.. They're all extensions of the DNC.
Those are very funny names what biting satire you must be a very smart and funny person
I really enjoyed the recent episode of NPR's Planet Money that applied the value of a statistical life concept (which arises often with wrongful death cases and hedonic damages) to the debate over whether to reopen the economy:
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/835571843
Covid is the new abortion debate. No one listens to each other and the louder you believe things the more "right" you are.
Or the new Climate Change debate.
It's pretty damn sad (although entirely predictable) that this has become so partisan.
I'm old enough to remember when there were a lot of issues that were not partisan.
Now it seems like the whole point is simply to *disagree* no matter what the issue.
@ 5:34, I must respectfully disagree.
7:04 wins post of the week.
I think of myself as a pragmatic libertarian. I generally prefer less government interference, but I'm also not a nihilist or anarchist. I understand the need for many laws even when they interfere with my absolute freedom.
For me, the core principle is this: Don't hurt other people. If you're doing something that harms you, I don't care. If you want to take lots of cocaine or engage in prostitution, I don't care. I ONLY care if that behavior harms other people who didn't consent to it. If you need to rob or embezzle to get money to buy your cocaine, I care. If you are spreading STIs because you're having unprotected sex for money, I care. (If you tell your sexual partner that you have an STI, and that person agrees to proceed, I go back to not caring.)
When I look at the current "liberty" arguments, including the ones made on this blog and by the people in these protests, I see people who are prepared to harm others — who did not consent to that harm — for their own freedom. That's not fair, and that's not what "liberty" is about. You don't get to spread disease and fill the hospitals (harm people) because you are tired of cutting your own hair or whatever.
Once there's a way to go back out and "reopen" the economy without causing unnecessary harm, I'm all in favor. Until then, suck it up.
Well said. The good news is that we will be open when there are enough tests. The bad news is that Donald Trump is in charge of the logistics for purchasing and distributing the tests.
Governor has responsibility for testing. So suck it DemocRat.
@1:54 doesn't understand that the Governors are in charge of their own states, not the President. The Federal govt. is a back up.
@ 1:47: You shelter in your home, you wear your mask, you wear your gloves. You are well prot4ected. So how am I harming you, if I chose not to believe that there is a serious risk to me from the Wuhan virus? You are protected and you won't get it, right?
Let me kill myself my way — by not wearing gloves, by not wearing a mask, by snorting lots of cocaine, etc. Of course, if herd immunity does exist, maybe I won't kill myself from this "risky" conduct. But I will not surrender my freedoms.
1:47. Those are words to live by. You summarize my thoughts better than I could have. You draw the line exactly where I do. What 3:42 and others are missing in their logic is that in this case they ARE harming us by their actions. At the heart of their argument should be the premise they forgot and that is that the world is so interconnected now that actions seemingly separate are in fact – not.
What @ OP and 4:16 are forgetting in their logic is that just because they are weaker than the rest of us, doesn't mean us stronger folks have to stay inside. Let the weak shelter in place and let the strong rebuild. #NaturalSelection
Wow I have not heard this argument since the Anti-Vaxxers were out in force last year. "So how am I harming you, if I chose not to believe that there is a [benefit from vaccines]? You are protected and you won't get it, right?" Complete misunderstanding of how herd immunity and rampant viral infection are related.
You will not surrender your freedoms but have no problem surrendering mine and ignoring that life accompanies liberty.
1:47 and 4:16 … you know you've won your argument when 4:46 accepts as the result of his reasoning the death of many people haha … good job guys/girls.
Congratulations guys. You have criminalized breathing in public because it might, possibly harm someone maybe. Your standards for removing civil liberties has gotten pretty low.
How many days after a hearing in front of the Discovery Commissioner do you have to submit the DCRR? Thanks.
Ten days.
Incorrect. The Amended EDCR 7.21 provides 14 days. All deadlines are now multiples of 7.
Presuming its the civil Commissioner and not the Family Court revolving door Commissioners.
I stand corrected. It's what I get for relying on the Nevada Legislature's rules publications, which I know are often grossly out of date.
My good friend just filed suit against the SBA in Las Vegas Federal Court re the 10K Emergency grant that some of us, including myself, applied for but never received. He did it pro bono for a single client who has been out of business for at least a month. I told him he was crazy to handle it that way, but I guess we all need to stick together so perhaps I will just have to be his virtual law clerk on this one. I give him kudos for the attempt. I will try to see if I can provide you all a link.
Does your friend think that the Economic Injury Disaster Loan creates rights in the business owner/applicant? I have not read the EIDL enabling act, and I have no opinion as to this. Is the legal theory one of equal protection?
I suspect that many of the participants here (including me) applied but have not received penny one. I hope you post the link.
If you want to file suit over the EIDL, you would have to file a tort claim with D.C., and wait six months, otherwise the suit will be dismissed for failing to exhaust administration remedies.
No he is seeking a writ and/or injunctive relief.
Here is the link he sent me. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9a1rpgo4gforl8j/4-20-20%20-%20complaint%20-%20LIT.pdf?dl=0
Good read: Good luck and hope your successful….
I really like Brian but his decision to sue the Federal Government seems to indicate that he took that Federal Bankruptcy judgeship rather hard.