- law dawg
- 120 Comments
- 4154 Views
- Conservation group set to sue Trump administration over fast-tracked geothermal project. [Nevada Current]
- Amid controversy, clock starts for construction of $200M “Campus for Hope” in Las Vegas. [RJ; Fox5Vegas]
- The A’s has activated a stadium construction camera. [News3LV]
- YouTuber could face death penalty in Strip shooting that killed content creator couple. [KTNV]
- Las Vegas approves $17.45M sale of Desert Pines Golf Course for housing project. [News3LV]
- Planning to attend law school? New student loan restrictions may affect the decision. [ABA Journal]
I mean is the ‘could face death penalty’ anything more than a fake bluff for negotiating down. No matter what side of the fence one is on, we’ve seen what an administrative mess any attempt at actually execute anyone is. But hey, maybe the charging entity is looking for a notch on the belt to get that paper and can leave it to someone else 12 years down the road to deal with the thousands of pages of appeals and challenges.
Gravy train is over (well, slowed down) for law professors and academic administrators. I’m no fan of Trump, but what the legal academy has been doing with tuition and federal student loans for the past 30 years is exploitative of both students and tax payers and immoral.
How fuckin’ hard could it be to run a law school that costs less than $50,000 per student per year to operate?
How many law professors are there at Boyd?
Boyd still lists the late Stan Hunterton as a professor so good luck figuring out who actually works there.
Boyd also lists some District Court Judges as professors, so now we know where they are spending their Fridays and every afternoon.
LMAO. Costs have not risen that exponentially since the mid-90’s when I paid $18k per year at a tier 2 school. Cost per student at ANY school is less than $20k, I don’t care what anyone else says.
Exactly
For fun, let’s clarify what the “legal academy” actually is. At Boyd Law School, the majority of faculty listed on the website are adjunct. The most significant expense for the law school, by far, is its full-time faculty and administrative staff. By contrast, the building and technology costs are relatively modest.
Most full-time faculty do lucrative outside legal work. Some also hold endowed “chairs,” meaning that part of their salary is funded by charitable donations. These professors typically earn between $250,000 and $350,000, combining university pay and funds from the endowment.
There’s lots of discussion about reducing law school to a one-year program or folding it into the undergraduate system. These ideas have merit. Regional law schools don’t really produce great “scholars” If you’ve read some of the work published by Boyd professors, you may find it underwhelming (understatement).
Law schools aren’t paying for labs and such like a medical school does.
Adjuncts make laughable little
Which is one of the ironic twists because adjuncts actually deliver value to the customer (students).
I know three attorneys that are adjuncts and I think it is around $3,500 per class.
Which just goes to show you if you strip out the overpaid “scholars” as professors, ABA accreditation requirements for libraries that are obsolete in the digital age, bloated costs of administrators, and just pay for the actual service (teaching by people who have real world experience), law school should cost no more than community college. Maybe less.
This is giving off huge college sophomore overnighter vibes:
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/1311/
Wtf did I just read?
Law school articles are such trash. That anyone would even classify this word salad as “scholarship” is absolutely insane. This article does nothing, for anyone, anywhere. It has probably been read in its entirety less than ten times since its publication five years ago.
This blog probably got this article read more today than everyday since its publication.
Not sure why you’re hating on this particular article. This article provides guidance for transactional lawyers to understand their ethical obligations under a poorly defined technology competence standard, and offers solutions to prevent disciplinary issues while improving client service. Not exactly word salad even if not your thing. Hate the game, not the current players
It could have been written by my high schooler.
If this article were about 10 bullet points, it could have been useful to practitioners.
“Hate the game, not the current players.” I think people are tired of watching the game and don’t want to pay the admission price anymore.
Kinda like the WNBA!
One year? What are we, fuckin’ real estate agents?
The cuts need to come from the bloated compensation paid to law professors who teach two classes a semester on repeat, working MAYBE 25 hours a week, and the academic administrators who pull down mid six figures doing literally not a fuckin thing.
The cuts SHOULD NOT come from the services provided. I won’t argue that 2L and 3L year are not productive, but they need to be retooled, not eliminated.
Kill the federal student loan subsidies and kill the bloat.
It’s just elementary at this point.
In the UK and like maybe Canada (?), law school is an extra year of undergrad followed by a series of PAID internships where you get to expert different areas of law. Compare that to other schools, and Boyd specifically. Four years of undergrad +three years of shitty law school classes = no real experience unless YOU seek it out and $100,000 to $200,000 in debt. This system only benefits full time profs who take long vacations. The vast majority of them couldn’t practice because it requires a lot of time, expertise and real experience, and business acumen (law prof non-classroom work is subsidized by the law school).
“like maybe Canada” No. Canada is post-college, and 3 years PLUS mandatory year of interning (articling).
Okay, just the UK then. There’s no bar exam in Canada, correct?
they teach realtors all they need to know in two weeks. cops get similar crash courses in law. It really doesn’t need to take three years.
Because Metro is so competent when it comes to constitutional law, right?
The police should have a college degree and a year’s training in civil rights.
This is bullshit. Law school is NOT there to teach you the law. Its is to teach you analysis and strategy in the context of the law.
Law school effectively changed the way my brain was wired and made me the successful practitioner that I have been for 25+. If law schools are no longer doing this, they are failing in favor of massively inflated amounts of student loan dollars, DEI and political correctness.
I venture to say you’re not a cognitive psychologist and simply believed the law school hype.
I venture to say that you are the aforementioned secondhand narcissist.
I didn’t (and don’t) believe anything I was (am) told. That is why I went to law school.
But myself, as an acutely aware personality, I intuitively and clearly recognize the changes that my brain made in my years in law school.
. . . . in the 90’s, when law school was actually tough.
Anything you do repeatedly changes the way you think (not your brain). Law school didn’t do that for you. You did it. Would have been the same in an undergraduate course on law—avoiding the law school loans.
Not particularly. Yes, I did it. . . . . with the guidance of professors that made me do the work.
I get that its no longer required and that the inmates run the proverbial asylum, but law school was a grind for which I am forever grateful, just like I grateful for a father that made me work and kicked my ass when I got out of line.
I am legitimately sad for the later crops of counselors that lack this discipline. But in all honesty, the profession as a whole suffers for this fact.
You must have had a kumbaya undergraduate experience. Mine wasn’t. And undergraduate law classes don’t have to be.
And I bet you walked to law school uphill both ways in the sleeting rain and snow. Give me a break.
Lazy comment.
Law schools aren’t less rigorous now. They were never that rigorous for those who sought out challenging classes in undergrad.
OOF, bad comparisons.
RE School is 120 hours.
“bloated compensation paid to law professors”
I don’t think they are paid that much. The real bloat is in the top heavy administration. And then there is the ABA requirements that schools have to meet, more admin, overhead.
But the real problem is that there is no way for a prospective student to gage value against price (tuition).
Law schools just keep upping tuition knowing there is little competition and no, repeat, no oversight on student loans.
Their salaries are public. You can look them up.
“2L and 3Lyear not productive”
Disagree strongly. 1L learns basics, fundamentals. 2L and 3L you develop balance in the application of law to facts, a better understanding of process and procedure and more nuanced law. Maybe got some practical experience interning.
That is, if you didn’t get through school relying on Gilbert summaries!
Gilbert summaries. LOL.Today students use the Internet (although AI has yet to be proven trustworthy). Way back when, I learned quickly that the case summary booklets were often wrong, and the Internet was unreliable back then as well. I figured out pretty quickly I needed to learn how to actually read the cases (using a four-color pen). I think I would have benefitted from the more robust Internet sources on case readings extant today in that I would have learned how to better spot more nuanced aspects of cases that were not even discussed in law school. However, my fear is we now have a generation of law school graduates who have never even read a case.
Reading printed, original text isn’t just superior for law students, it is best for all of us. I hate how public schools use almost exclusively digital material.
Yes. I can’t cit, but recent studies have shown students retain more with physical print and handwritten notes. Something about the handwriting helps the memory.
Okay Boomer, I give up. What’s a Gilbert summary?
It’s not that recent that these things went away. Gilbert summaries were essentially “cliffs notes” of the class.
What’s a Cliff Note?
understatement of the century
This is a good start. But entirely ending the federal guaranty on student loans would really solve the problem. Student loans were really never a good idea; allowing the federal government to administer the program was just outright dumb.
Student loans can be predatory, but they’re often the only option for students who don’t come from wealthy backgrounds. There’s a real tension between the burden of debt and the need to ensure access to education. Personally, I wouldn’t have been able to attend law school if I hadn’t received a full scholarship. That’s why the idea of making legal education part of an undergraduate program makes a lot of sense to me—it could reduce both cost and barriers to entry.
Restore BK protection and make the schools indemnify a portion of the loans. Market sorts it out, problem solved.
If student loans were not federally guaranteed, they would not be thrown out willy-nilly to every tom dick and harriette that wanted to go to law school and we would not be stuck working opposite these knuckleheads while they cry about their student loan interest.
“Personally, I wouldn’t have been able to attend law school if I hadn’t received a full scholarship.” And if you hadn’t been awarded that scholarship, would going $200k into nondischargeable debt have been a good idea? I’m guessing not.
The whole “access to education for poor kids” argument ultimately fails. Those are the last people who should be taking out nondischargeable loans for education. Those are the people who most probably come from families that were not financially literate. They are the people who are least able to appreciate and assess the absolute nightmare of taking on $200k in nondischargeable debt.
A banker will save that poor kid from himself. But a university’s financial “aid” salesman won’t!
Well, that’s the question. Is going into $200k of debt for a third tier law school worth it? The risk is not passing the bar exam and getting a low paying job even after becoming licensed. For a few, they double or triple the median salary of other industries.
“but they’re often the only option for students who don’t come from wealthy backgrounds”
True. Few of us go to Ivy League schools. For the majority, the loan grantor should consider the tuition cost. Is it reasonable in the law school market place?
If this was done, school tuitions would become competitive.
Agree. The focus should on the bloat in academia at all levels, not just the professional level. But at the JD level, why can’t these professors take on a full workload that adds up to 40 hours per week. They teach 1-3 classes. Have limited office hours. Have a sucker law student research and write their publications. Total sham.
Good luck asking a Boomer law professor to give up his $200,000/year sinecure.
Closer to $250k-$350k.
I agree on your assessment of law schools/law profs, but contrast that to undergraduate professors, or professors who teach undergraduate and graduate courses. Those profs do teach more classes, are required to hold office hours, and go through the strenuous process of peer review. They also make much far less in salary. The suckers are us for paying for law school.
I missed the biggest story in the morning paper which is Wiese going to the County Commission and demanding 18 more judges and getting pushback from the Commissioners.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/clark-county/clark-county-debates-need-for-additional-courthouse-3398050/
18 more judges when the RJC is a ghost town on Fridays and M-Th afternoons. Hard pass.
Raise the pay for law clerks and require that they have a few years of practice before they can be hired for those jobs. That’s where the real breakdown in the judicial system occurs.
i law clerked out of l school. It was an incredible learning experience. Luckily i worked for a well respected, experienced and thoughtful judge. I suspect she barely needed my help other than general case management and organizational purposes. That noted,, i imagine if i got drafted to be a law clerk for a PD/DA judge with no civil experience it would have been an absolute shit show if they were meant to rely on me in any meaningful manner.
Can you imagine how sloppy the addition of 18 new judges would be?
They’re going to have to add a whole new appellate level
Increase the number of judges. Increase the number of law clerks per chamber. Increase law clerk pay so that we can have more experienced law clerks. Fixed it.
I understand the point that the caseload per chamber is not ideal. But man, the talent pool is thin enough, i shudder to think of the quality of candidates voting for 18 new divisions. I would suggest if it is increased it should be actual complex lit specialty courts with higher pay and dedicated facilities. No being a 50/50 judge and then getting drafted to business court because someone retired. Or even just having ‘trial courts.’ When a judge gets stuck in a complex trial, any one that has standard motion practice pays the price of an inattentive judge and chambers.
Just would create the chance for Lombardo to put 18 more DAs on the bench
Lombardo appointed 3 DAs to the bench. He also appointed Gaudet, Reynolds, and Rincon — all from the civil/family court world.
When appointing someone who would deal with criminal cases, you expect the former sheriff to appoint a public defender?
Adriana Rincon White was in an appointment that had no DAs in the nomination process.
Paul Gaudet was in a nomination process that had no DAs.
On the civil bench, Lombardo appointed DAs 3 (Chio, Talim and Mendoza) out of 4 times. So in answer to your question I would expect the Governor to appoint people who actually have some experience in civil law.
You do know we elect our judges and appointments only happen when there’s a vacancy, right? Right??!
He failed at the legislature so now he’s going hat in hand around the neighborhood. They’d have fewer cases if they followed the law and kicked cases that should be kicked.
Between Notice Pleadings and Judges being scared about appellate rate it is just so much easier to kick the can down to trial and hope the parties settle because ‘who knows what a juries gonna do’
Easier. But not proper. The number of EJDC judges who are regularly sending questions of law to a jury is astounding.
Weise asking for 18 and hoping for 6-10. Not exactly earth shattering.
Imagine getting whacked for antitrust activities and then bragging how you are still engaging in antitrust activities less than a year after the whacking? Sounds like its time to bring a new antitrust case.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/housing/las-vegas-real-estate-agents-using-loopholes-to-charge-higher-commissions-3396562/
Real estate agents are not the brightest and best among us, and given that this is Vegas, that’s saying a lot.
Smart enough to leverage a potentially devastating smack to their livelihood into a nominal pay increase.
Don’t hate the players, hate the game.
LVMPD Officer arrested for (1) DUI, (2) reckless driving/speeding 41+ mph over the limit, (3) no proof of insurance, (4) driving an unregistered vehicle (5) failure to yield to emergency vehicle; (6) failure to maintain lane; and (5) disobeying peace officer and endangering other person. I think he checked off the entire bingo card.
https://www.lvmpd.com/Home/Components/News/News/2119/263
He has been employed with LVMPD since 2020. He is currently assigned to the Community Safety Division, Northwest Area Command
I can hardly wait for the TIKTOK.
Commissioner Fontano just went nuclear on a pro se who kept interrupting him. He has been so patient with off the rails pro se litigants over the last few years. A human can only take so much. The pro se litigant this morning was completely nutso, aggressive and obstructionist.
James Fontano
District Court Probate Commissioner
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Homelessness gets worse whether we throw taxpayer money at it or not. Tax money spent on homelessness does little other than enrich stakeholders in the now-burgeoning homelessness industry.
So why not just let the productive people keep their tax dollars? The government has proven it can’t solve the problem.
The biggest indicator for homelessness is not having access to a home. Governments can and do play a role in whether homes are adorable or expensive.
How does one get to the point where they can use the term “now-burgeoning homelessness industry?”
I’m sorry for the pain you have so clearly suffered in your life, but inflicting pain on others will not help.
Creating a system with economic incentive to keep them perpetually homeless doesn’t alleviate their pain either.
Homeless, observation
Government and private entities have been throwing money at this problem for a long time. No organization, individual or governmental agency has been able to solve it.
As an aside. Los Angeles tried by renting an entire multi story hotel for housing the homeless. They (the tenants) destroyed the entire building making the building a ghetto.
The City paid $11.5 Million to cover the damages.
Let charities and churches do their jobs and productive taxpayers to fund them.
like this if you have more than $250k in student loans.
I know an ID lawyer, who graduated from a 4th tier toilet in 2009. He’s still an associate. I bet he barely makes $100 a year, if that. He graduated with more than $200k in loans and hasn’t paid a penny toward the principal. Law school fucked him hard.
He effed himself. He should’ve become a welder or a truck driver.
Let’s face it, we all know a plethora of lawyers that should have become truck drivers.
Make students loan Dischargeable in BK.
Or just make them like any other loan; let a banker assess the creditworthiness of the borrower and make an underwriting decision. If a bank tells you you can’t have a loan, that probably means you shouldn’t be borrowing money. Get the government out of the business all together.
How do you barely make $100K a year in ID after 16 years?
By having absolutely no business being in the practice, period.
Honesty. Can’t advance if you aren’t willing to bill 27 hours a day.
What’s a 4th tier law school? Thomas School?
Like this if you never plan on paying your loans back.
If, e.g., a PI atty wins at trial, can they move separately for attorneys fees based on their contingency fee agreement? Are they entitled to recover a flat %?
In Nevada, the method upon which a reasonable fee is determined is subject to the discretion of the court, which is tempered only by reason and fairness. Accordingly, in determining the amount of fees to award, the court is not limited to one specific approach; its analysis may begin with any method rationally designed to calculate a reasonable amount, including those based on a “lodestar” amount or a contingency fee. Whichever method is chosen as a starting point, however, the court must continue its analysis by considering the requested amount in light of the factors enumerated by this court in Brunzell v. Golden Gate National Bank, namely, the advocate’s professional qualities, the nature of the litigation, the work performed, and the result. In this manner, whichever method the court ultimately uses, the result will prove reasonable as long as the court provides sufficient reasoning and findings in support of its ultimate determination
Shuette v. Beazer Homes Holdings Corp., 121 Nev. 837, 842, 124 P.3d 530, 535 (2005)
this is old law. Capriati case (Capriati v. Yahyavi) states you can seek fees solely based on contingency fee. “We now clarify that a district court may award the entire contingency fee as post-offer attorney fees under NRCP 68 because the contingency fee does not vest until the client prevails.”
Original poster did not mention anything about an Offer of Judgment being served so not sure why you are citing Capriati.
Does anyone have the citation or case number for Alexander Lopez v. Henderson Police Department, the $600,000 wrongful arrest case? Who was Plaintiff’s attorney?
Client rude and abusive on phone because defense would not accept his latest settlement demand. I suggested Mediation. Began screaming at me. He said he would be down to my office in 5 minutes. He arrived and I refused to see him. He talked to our paralegal. How do you handle out of control clients who are unreasonable and threatening? My first thought was to fire him and put a lien on the file.
That’s BS you made your paralegal handle it. Go out front and show the client to the door and tell him to call you Monday once he’s cooled off. If he refuses fire him and call the cops for trespassing.
I had told him to come Monday morning and he showed up 5 minutes later at my office. If I had met with him it would only result in a screaming match.
No, stand up and be the attorney and handle the issue.
The paralegal is not handling the issue. I told him to come back on Monday.
Fire the client already. Particularly if the client was similarly rude to the paralegal when he showed up at the office.
100%. It’s a chicken shit move to make a paralegal handle crazy people (clients, opposing counsel, jilted mistresses, etc.). Put on your big boy pants, proverbially kick their ass for disrespecting your staff and then fire them. You gotta be loyal to your people.
Never subject your staff to abusive clients. Take the bullet and get your clients in line. If they don’t get there, fire and lien. Document the shit out of the clients behaviour.
Document his behavior and fire him yesterday. Lien the file. He will be genuinely confused when every prospective replacement attorney he speaks with is just too busy to take his case.
https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/23-15489/23-15489-2025-04-28.pdf?ts=1745857905
The law blog is an
interesting mix of smugness and cluelessness. Going take a break from
it for awhile. The conceit is stomach turning.
I was suffering from stomach turning conceit as well. I took a break from the blog, no relief. Finally, I went to see Doctor Vinnie Boombatz. He says to me: “you’ve got secondhand narcissism and a severe allergy to people who think out loud in paragraphs.” He prescribed me a mirror and told me to apologize to my reflection. Twice.
perfect example
Enjoy your sabbatical, professor.
https://nevadalaw.info/2025/07/24/judge-sanctions-law-firm-1-million-for-failing-to-disclose-defendants-insurance-policies/