- law dawg
- 55 Comments
- 2535 Views
- Michele Fiore’s appointed attorney, Paola Armeni, argues to keep judge salary after guilty verdict. [RJ; PVTimes]
- Defendant’s TikTok post leads to his capture (plus criticism of Judge Jessica Peterson for assessing him as “not a flight risk” after found guilty for leaving scene of accident). [8NewsNow]
- CCSD trustee files complaint alleging three other board personnel, including counsel, broke open meeting laws. [KTNV]
- CCSD tech chief went to Disney World in midst of massive data breach, staffers say. [RJ]
Great weekend. WWWY, both days.
Exhausted. Can’t wait for next year.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/las-vegas/an-attorneys-past-judicial-campaigns-have-been-marked-by-controversy-hes-running-again-3192088/
This is amusing boundary maintenance over the surname “Leavitt.” In one corner, we have James Dean Leavitt, who isn’t a Vegas Leavitt at all, but claims to have burnished the family brand to the benefit of the thousands of Vegas Leavitts in the valley. In the other corner, we have Madeline Cole, who, at no time, has ever had the surname Leavitt. Too funny. In sum, on one side, we have a Leavitt that isn’t really a Leavitt and on the other a Leavitt who was never a Leavitt at all. And they aren’t running against each other. Comedy gold.
I guess we all get to have a shot at policing use of the Leavitt name.
-10:31 “Leavitt” AM
LEAVITT: Okay sir, you’re a Leavitt, I’m a Leavitt, that’s terrific, I’m very busy so what can I do for you?
DUDE: Well sir, it’s this rug I have, really tied the room together-
LEAVITT: You told Brandt on the phone, he told me. So where do I fit in?
DUDE: Well they were looking for you, these two guys, they were trying to–
LEAVITT: I’ll say it again, all right? You told Brandt. He told me. I know what happened. Yes? Yes?
DUDE: So you know they were trying to piss on your rug–
As an actual Southern Nevada Leavitt Leavitt (but not Myron’s branch), I’d just as soon neither of them won.
Madilyn Leavitt Cole is Justice Myron’s E. Leavitt’s direct granddaughter. Madilyn Leavitt Cole is Judge Michelle Leavitt’s daughter. She’s a Leavitt.
>Madilyn Leavitt Cole
Is that her middle name or maiden name?
Has she used it before this judicial campaign?
She has never used the name before, just like Amy Chelini had never used the name “Joanne” before. It is not against any of the judicial canons or election laws, and frankly, she’s the better candidate.
But it seems intentionally misleading so that’s disqualifying for a candidate for judge in my opinion.
“Madilyn Leavitt Cole”
That’s not her name. She has never had the name Leavitt ever.
-2:12 “Leavitt” PM.
Cynthia, your defeat is 2 weeks away. Sorry you’re so bitter.
Ouch. What was disqualifying for me is the ad she took out saying Cynthia”doesn’t care about our community” (referring to Hispanics) and that she “evicts our families.” This and that bizarre tick tic video.
Yeah when David Brown and Amy Ferreira are who evict people; Judge Dustin-Cruz does not evict anyone.
What video? I missed this.
But she is not. She is a Fitzpatrick who became a Cole. She never was a Leavitt. You do not get to claim your mother’s maiden (renewed) name as your name because it is politically expedient when you have never held that name except for politics.
Cynthia does not want educated voters. She does not want anyone to know that her opponent is at least a third generation native Las Vegan, is one of “those” Leavitts that all the other natives know and have positive impressions of. Voters *should* know the family Madilyn comes from because that’s a central part of who she is, her upbringing, her background, etc.
Madilyn is a Leavitt. Any claim that she is not is misogynistic.
There is nothing misogynistic about this situation at all. If Mark Fitzpatrick wanted to run as Mark “Leavitt” Fitzpatrick even though he had never had that name, people would be raising the same objection that that is not now and never has been his name. If she had been Madilyn Leavitt before her marriage and wanted to use her maiden name that she is now by (e.g. Susan Holland Johnson) no one would object. But this has never been her name.
The very fact that you think who someone’s grandpa was is an important consideration is frightening.
Mark is not and never has been a Leavitt. Not a blood relative.
Apples/Oranges.
You didn’t understand; there is no real Mark. We are changing Madilyn’s name to Mark for this hypothetical and saying if Madilyn was a man named Mark doing this (with all of the same facts) it would likewise be decried. There is no misogyny in pointing out that a candidate taking on a name that they have never had as their name is tantamount to fraud.
She literally IS a Leavitt. Whether or not she has donned the name, she is a Leavitt. Like direct descendent of the man himself.
We all know that the use of the name is convenient and for election purposes. If that is a deal killer for you, then knock yourself out.
But some of us remember when the current wearer of that robe was just Cynthia Dustin. She absolutely did not hyphenate her husbands name until she ran for office. PERIOD! Goose/Gander
Cynthia’s legal name is Dustin-Cruz. Madilyn’s legal name is not now and never has been Leavitt. She is less a person entitled to use the name Leavitt for legal purposes than Cynthia is to the name Dustin-Cruz. You see we have legal ways of changing one’s name. Michelle was a Leavitt and then had her name changed back to Leavitt. If Madilyn upon reaching the age wished to have her name changed to Leavitt, then she could have a legitimate claim that she uses the name Leavitt. She did not and does not.
Nonetheless, Dustin did not hyphenate her name until running for office (years after being married) and did so in order to publicly track hispanic and fool voters. Do not deny it. This convenience is for subversive political gain. Its not really any different for Cole. Although to say she is not a Leavitt is misleading, as she carries Leavitt blood.
Law of unintended consequences rears its ugly head.
This should not matter. You don’t inherit legal acumen or wisdom genetically. Nor do judges make the best parents. Strange women lying about their name claiming wisdom is no basis for a system of government. Supreme judicial power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical name inheritance.
If you’re going to attack somebody, don’t create straw(wo)men. Not sure anybody is alleging legal acumen via genetics.
The claim is she was raised sitting around tables with judges and lawyers talking about cases, the law, etc. That she has observed/shadowed/talked to 10+ attorneys from a very young age, which shaped her view of the law, why she went to law school, etc.
Whether that plays into your calculus as you decide who to vote for is your choice, of course.
This is not a straw woman. This is a woman claiming that her name is something that it is not now and never has been. Does this mean that if someone always wanted to be a lawyer and met with lawyers from the time that they were a little kid that they get to run as “Stew Bell” or “Roger Foley.”
we should have women lying in ponds distributing swords of gavels instead…
Just a few more weeks and we can Leavitt all behind.
Leavitt alone.
Love it or Leavitt.
I am amused by all this Leavitty
Leavitt to Leavitt
Take it or Leavitt.
Took my Chevy to the Leavitt but that Leavitt was dry.
Todd Bice bringing the heat in the LDS Church’s Reply for their Motion to Intervene! It opens up by declaring that the opposition to the motion to intervene is “the height of inconsistency.” “NRPA is flat wrong.” [massive list of cases cited for the proposition that, indeed, the position taken by NRPA is flat wrong.] “The only thing untimely here is NRPA’s Opposition.” “In fact, one of the Church’s reasons for intervening is to push for a prompt resolution so it can get on with exercising the rights granted by the Zoning Approvals.” Possibly the most petty was dropping in the “[sic]” when quoting the Opposition referring to it as a “Disney-land like structure.” A-24-895510-J.
The Motion to Intervene is on chambers calendar for Thursday. I’d place money on Israel granting the Motion to Intervene and then granting the motion to dismiss the entire case.
Typo in your case number, should be A-24-899510-J
Do you think Hooge envisions himself Teancum who will metaphorically sweep down upon this case and show his “great valor” in this case.
This makes no sense.
it’s a book of mormon joke. the actual book, not the broadway musical.
2:06 PM here. Yeah I know that. I’ve read the book a trillion times. I just don’t get what Hooge and Teancum have to do with the temple lawsuit.
I was thinking about this, and if I was Israel and I just wanted to swat this nuisance thing away, this is what I would do: (1) Grant the Motion to Intervene. Give the Church two weeks to respond to/join the motion to dismiss and to file an Opposition to the PJR, then give the NPRA another two weeks to file a replies. Now the Church has intervened and fully asserted its position. Then file an order ruling in favor of the Church/City on the substance but also stating the NPRA has no standing. That creates a clear record on both substance/procedure and makes sure the Church is afforded due process.
Is a PJR appealable? I assume so. If Israel manages this the way I propose, it puts NPRA in an impossible position of having to overcome standing and the substantive arguments.
Also, NPRA filed what appears to be a second, back up lawsuit in anticipation of losing on standing in this one. I hope the Church lets Bice loose to beat the shit out of these people on res judicata. Sanctions definitely warranted.
I envision a Minute Order with exactly zero legal analysis.
Be completely humble and gentle. Be patient, bearing with one another in love. Ephesians 4:2
Had a client request a flat fee today. In a pre-Sull world, I would have happily done it. Instead, I informed the client we no longer offer flat fees. Just hourly work.
Historically, when people cannot get at least heard by the courts they seek alternatives. #FightTheCabal
Had the deadline for a petition for rehearing not been blown, perhaps the issue could have been “heard by the courts”
What was their response?
It’s generally pretty easy to see who benefits from changes like this. But this opinion benefits zero people. Awful for clients and attorneys. No relationship to actual ethics. It’s OUR bar. Just keep doing it. The over-intellectual dipsticks on Supreme Court, who’ve never practiced, going to set their pitbull Hooge, never practiced and can’t even make a deadline, on the whole criminal bar?
Today’s excitement was brought to you by the Family Law List serve. Person A makes a negative comment about rule changes. Persons B, C and D chime in. And then the “big cheese” moderator says, “Behave, children!” The big cheese then posts the list serve rules in bold and highlighted in yellow where offending comments are not permitted. Then the big cheese reports: Disciplinary action has been taken against those members that violated the list serve rules. I’m shaking in my shoes! NOT! If the big cheese runs for judge, he/she can expect my immediate support of his/her opponent.
How can I login or see the list serve please.
You need to be a member of the family law section.
This morning, we all gathered round in the foyer of our office building. We took turns reading the emails aloud. We belly laughed until we cried. We agree with the comments made by persons B and C with regard to person A. Here comes the discipline. Please big cheese don’t sic the cat on me.
I am so glad I don’t practice family law.
I can’t think of an area of practice that is covered in so much dysfunction and “ick”.
The entire family court division needs massive reforms. The majority of the attorneys I work with intentionally try to drum up conflict so they can make money off the misery of that hell hole. I’m becoming more and more convinced that some of the judges are just bought and paid for. There’s no other explanation for the insanity.
Who is the cheese and do they stand alone?
Curious – with the return of over a decade of bonds from the court, what, if anything was done to the persons in charge of accounting for and returning the money? How did they miss this massive pile of money for such a long long long time? Was it in an interest bearing account?