Monday, November 23, 2015

To Your Health


  • Judge Richard Scotti gave Centennial Hills Hospital the "least-onerous sanction" he could impose and still mitigate the extreme prejudice caused by its, ahem, discovery failures. [RJ; copy of Judge Scotti's 39-page order]
  • More on whether that woman the Supreme Court opined about last week is brain dead. [RJ]
  • There is a new veteran-based political advocacy group in Nevada that will be endorsing candidates in the next election. [RJ]
  • A new study says lawyers have the lowest health, highest rates of alcohol use. [CBS Atlanta]

10 comments:

  1. I can only imagine the raging anger of He Who Shall Not Be Named. I hope that this banishes Him from politics forever. The only reason that candidates and judges debased themselves in front of Him was because they wanted the endorsement of an organization with the name "Veterans" in it and figured that voters were too stupid or lazy to discover who He is and what He is really about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I actually came to the website this morning specifically to post the link to the RJ article about the competitor to He Who Shall Not Be Named. The fact that we have to call this asshat that name is yet more evidence supporting why the new organization was created. Naively I'm wondering whether HWSNBN created his organization with the same original intent but was corrupted by the money others were willing to pay to buy an endorsement.

      Delete
  2. 8:10 am "voters were too stupid or lazy"

    That phrase could apply to any aspect of Nevada politics. The He Who Shall Not Be Named situation is only one of almost limitless examples.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Has anyone successfully submitted their Annual Disclosures on the State Bar's crappy new member information system? They've been announcing that it would be available in November, but all I get is a circular path - http://www.nvbar.org/content/pay-license-fees-and-submit-annual-disclosures to the new system, which links back to http://www.nvbar.org/content/pay-license-fees-and-submit-annual-disclosures. And for this I pay some of the highest bar dues in the nation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And they're generally useless in preventing or remedying UPL and violations of ethical rules.

      Delete
    2. Honestly, I wonder what it is that I am paying for.

      Delete
    3. Of course, I was able to pay my dues. Couldn't access documents. Why would the bar want to go after "feralegals?" IMHO, they are potential bar members! There is a push at Family Court to have the mediation center take on financial issues (there goes that semester in law school) and to allow feralegals to appear for their "customers" and/or clients. Your choice. I'm just watching my experience and education become valueless with the bar's inertia.

      Delete
    4. If you are competing with "feralegals" for business you have bigger concerns. That is like losing your job to an illegal immigrant who has no money, no contacts, no experience, no education and does not speak English. If you lose business to a "feralegal" then you should consider a new profession.

      Delete
    5. I'm of the opinion that feralegals create more work than they take with the way they regularly fuck things up and mangle them.

      Delete
  4. If you can't beat them, join them.

    ReplyDelete