- Quickdraw McLaw
- 30 Comments
- 1527 Views
Well, it’s just about time to call it a wrap on 2022. Here’s a quick look back at the top stories that affected the Las Vegas legal community this year. Before we do that, thanks again for reading, commenting, and offering your input because without you, the blog is dead. As always, we’re open to your suggestions on how we can improve the blog, so if you have any comments, criticisms, ideas, gossip, or want to volunteer to write a guest post, let us know. Here’s wishing you a happy 2023! Maybe we’ll see you again next year!
Our top ten Las Vegas related legal stories of 2022, in no particular order, are:
8. Doug Crawford was arrested and charged.
7. Former Raiders player Henry Ruggs still hasn’t had his preliminary hearing.
6. There were several changes at the RJC with some judicial elections (long waits for results) and retirements, and four positions to be filled early next year (and there’s still time to submit your application). Justice Abbi Silver resigned from the Supreme Court. Justice Hardesty is retiring. Patricia Lee appointed to the Supreme Court.
5.Matthew Beasley was involved in the shooting of an FBI Agent.
4. We sort of got, momentarily, two new probate commissioners this year, and there are major delays on filings in that part of the court.
3. RIP Sam Lionel, Mark Jackson, Judge Mathew Harter, Ben Graham, Juanita Colvin, Stephen Stein, Mills Lane, Marla Hudgens, Truong Thai, Jeff German, and all of our other colleagues, friends, and family we lost this year.
2. Justice of the Peace Michele Fiore. [MSNBC]
1. Robert Telles was arrested in connection with the murder of Jeff German.
* Honorable Mentions
- We discussed how some of you like to sneak lyrics or movie quotes into your pleadings.
- Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
- Margaret Rudin’s federal conviction was vacated.
- Dobbs opinion overturning Roe v. Wade leaked before it was issued.
- Drought at Lake Mead turns up bodies in barrels.
- “Serial” subject Adnan Syed was freed.
- Kate Bush’s Running Up That Hill soared to the top of the charts 35 years later.
- Monkeypox was a thing.
- 988 is now active as the number for the Suicide and Crisis Hotline.
What do you think? What did we miss? What do you think will be the big stories next year? Which big firm is teetering on the brink? Any judges about to have that meltdown that pushes them into the spotlight? Any wild predictions about 2023? Stay tuned….
Thanks for another year of posting relevant, timely content and providing a place to be human while also being an attorney.
Thanks for cleaning up this blog. I do not think that it is a big secret that this blog for years seemed exciting in the way that an out of control roller coaster is fun. Going back to 2012-2014, things went on here that were beyond any sense of decency, salacious like a BumFights video. Do not think that your efforts to keep this blog topical, fair and not degenerating into madness again go unnoticed.
You clearly don't remember the Wild Wild Law Blog.
This is 11:31…. I clearly and vividly do remember WWL which gave the R/J comments section and "Hawkeye" a run for their money. But the early days here were not much better.
I kinda miss it TBH.
Having seen what was deleted on some occasions, I disagree with 11:31. Not my blog. I hope the moderators take to heart the lessons of the Twitter file revelations. This blog also became a administrative state enforcer of big lies.
Curious: what lies do you believe have been enforced by this blog?
@5:43 in response to your question "what lies do you believe have been enforced by this blog?" This blog only allows pro-Left comments. This post itself is likely to be deleted because it's calling out the Moderators. So, with only pro-Left viewpoints, you don't get the truth. You only get the propaganda.
@ 11:21 and 11:31, thanks for the kind words. We love and appreciate almost all of our readers and commenters!
@ 5:15 and 6:14, I've said it many times before, and unfortunately, I'm sure I'll have to say it many more times. This is a Las Vegas LAW blog. This is not a Las Vegas or world politics blog. If your comments are "pro-Right" or "pro-Left", please post somewhere else. We do our best to keep the comments generally on-topic and constructive. If you don't like the job we are doing, we respect your opinion, and encourage you to start your own blog or post on some other platform (and take the political negativity with you).
Well said, bloglord. My suspicion is 5:15/6:14 thinks anything not fully supporting the far right wagon is "pro-left." But also the idea that only pro-right comments are deleted is wrong. Batshit conversations that go off the rails on politics are deleted because it wastes everybody's time.
#freethegrinch
#freebonniebulla
#freetheeggnog
#freethemcleaffirm
#freethecomments
Hey, SBN my cle credits are in, but I cannot sign the affirmation, What gives?
Haha silly…as if the bar makes anything easy on us. They'd rather fund OBC to harass solos than pay for a functional website.
11:35 – you are correct! It never seems real until they're knocking on YOUR door.
Are you sure you didn't sign it? All it takes is a single click. The button is found under "License Renewal."
Yes. the CLE affirmation is obviously under "License Renewal" rather than any of the MCLE headings. Makes perfect sense.
Im late too BC I could not find it. They should not charge late fee for their messed up placement.
SBN sent out at least 5 emails in which they described the location of the affirmation of attendance. I will freely admit to not having ready any of those before I tried to find the button and failed. I figured I'd just missed them (ha! Only if "missed" means totally ignored) so I did a search for the keyword, found one, and get mine in on time.
Yea, I could not find mclean affirm either. Newsletters go in spam. So bar's web site design sucks
I cannot find it either. Where is it? The mcle affirmation location is not straight forward at all. Watch well still have pay the $100 bc board of governonrs website sucks,
Supreme Court's new opinion on child support arrears is fantastic. It's about time the child support court and the DA's office is called out and the district court judges that rubber stamp their nonsense can start getting overturned. Child support court and the hearing masters down there have long been a joke. They routinely put people in handcuffs without counsel and without due process. They litigate against parties in a capricious manner when the DA is supposed to be neutral. The hearing masters never get held accountable because the judges give them a free pass. The hearing masters routinely disregard established case law. It's all a joke. I hope the rumors that the COA and the Supremes are going to start cracking down on family court is true.
Hooray!
Link/name of the case?
Perez v Haywood. It’s COA, not the supremes.
I hope that this is more significant than it appears.
https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseView.do?csIID=64333
2:41-I largely agree with you as to the problems you identify.
But the decision you quote does not stand for the premise that you cite it for–that being that the review courts are slamming the hearing masters, judges, and D.A.'s office, for trampling over the rights of respondents with child support orders and ordering them to pay huge, unjustified arrearages.
In fact, the factual situation is the exact opposite of what you describe. In this case, the hearing master, judge, and D.A's office are maintaining that the mother should be entitled to vey minimum arrears, and not the several years she request.
The COA returns it to the District Court with orders to conduct evidentiary proceedings as to the mother's claim for several years of back support. Also, the COA is slamming the D.A for being too proactive and too involved as to their position that the Respondent should not be required to pay any major back support.
So, sorry to turn it back around on you, and yes I understand the decision recites a somewhat complex, detailed and multi-hearing history, but none of these entities(hearing master, judge, D.A's Office) took the position that obligor should pay all these back arrears, and in fact took the absolute opposite position.
And looking at the facts one can understand why. Mom, apparently without a court order or written permission of the other parent, moved the child(or children) out-of-state, facilitated and permitted very little if any contact between the father and children, but then crops up several years later and demands not only current support but several years of back support.
She received the current support, but only like a couple months back support, and thus this appeal as Mom wants several years of back support, for the period when she may have been essentially concealing the children out-of-state from the father(according to how the facts are presented).
presented).
Please stop acting like the COA does what it wants to do. They get their marching orders from the fucked up Nevada Supreme Court.