Friday, February 24, 2017

Stay Cool


  • Today's the last day to get in your application to be considered for appointment to the bench in departments 10 and 18. Here are the applicants so far.
  • Here's a nice article about the CCBA. [Nevada Business

54 comments:

  1. Some new faces. Tierra and JP are on the usual track, spend a few years in DA/PD and get promoted (with a raise) to judge. Both are okay though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tierra claims to have graduated from Law School and Undergrad in the same year. Quite an impressive feat.

      Delete
    2. The number of typos in all of these is really depressing.

      Delete
    3. I didn't compare the number of typos to the schools attended.. how many are graduates of CCSD and/or UNLV?

      Delete
  2. Gentile can't submit a better picture than that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gentile looks like he just came out of an AA meeting and hates his (sober) life lol

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. Gentile looks like he is at the Kinkos.

      Delete
  3. There has to be last minute applicants. This is crazy. Because of the restriction on only applying for one department, people must be waiting until the 11th hour to submit. God help us if these are the names submitted to Sandoval. I might actually clamor to get Jessie Walsh back as opposed to these clowns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. I rarely practice in Reno, but there are several people on that list who are well-qualified. Not so down here.

      Delete
    2. Agreed. Ayres and Robb (who is already a DJ) on that list.

      Delete
    3. The way I read it, membership in the LDS church is a qualification for District Court in Reno. Am I incorrect? I think Sunny and Tierra are qualified down here, you guys seem to act as if our judiciary is stocked with Harvard grads... appoint people who know how to do the job, not morons who want to hear themselves speak. I went to a top 30 law school and a top 25 undergrad and I can look impressive on paper, but you sure as shit wouldn't want me on the bench.

      Delete
    4. @3:01, not a Harvard grad but one of the applicants is a Yale grad... but then so was President George W. Bush..

      Delete
  4. 13 applications for the Washoe County Department? Did every attorney in Reno throw their hat in?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, why is Bridge Robb applying? She's already a district court judge. Is this her seat? Does she want to move departments? What good would that even do?

      Delete
    2. She is in family court in Washoe from her Personal Statement

      Delete
    3. I believe she's in Family Court, and wants to shift over to standard District Court, and preside over criminal matters, and non-domestic civil matters. Family Court can kind of burn people out. Plus there may be more perceived status in serving in Civil/Criminal District Court. Admittedly, I'm just speculating as to her possible motivations.

      Delete
    4. She was a (good) commercial litigation attorney so her experience is in civil matters, including Business Court level matters.

      Delete
  5. For those who think the appointment process attracts far superior lawyers to those who are candidates in judicial elections, the current slate of applicants should contradict such notion. There are a few here who would be okay, but I don't really see any superstars. Also, the appointment process, in its own way, can be just as political as the election process--albeit in a different manner. This is often proven by the fact that each time an appointment occurs, attorneys will(validly) bemoan the fact that three or four vastly better and more qualified applicants were passed over.

    But at least with the appointment process, unlike the election process, you seldom wind up with someone really bad or unacceptable(although over the decades there have been a number of exceptions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Berna Rhodes-Ford wins dept 18.

    Qualification: Married to Aaron Ford (Senate Majority Leader) and presumably endorsed by Eglet Machine.

    No nepotism here.

    https://youtu.be/5NNOrp_83RU

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Typo on the cover page. You can be qualified and be sloppy.

      Delete
    2. unfortunate she didn't take the time to edit her statement as she isn't applying for Dept 29 this time.

      Delete
    3. And Sandoval is not appointing a Ford.

      Delete
    4. My money is that Rhodes-Ford doesn't make it through the selection committee to the final 3.

      Delete
    5. Would he appoint a Lincoln?

      Delete
  7. Replies
    1. He must be sick of dealing with Eddie Haddad.

      Delete
    2. The word on the street is that the Investor entities are running out of money to fight the litigation. Eddie was never a great paying client, which makes you wonder if Bohn took some of these cases on the come and might be seeing that there is no money in the immediate future because there is no way for investors to settle these cases with the Banks without complete capitulation.

      Delete
    3. He's still appealing the cases that he continues to lose.

      Delete
    4. He won the 350 Durango case, at least on constitutionality.

      Delete
    5. The banks will be like Sheldon Adelson with the Richard Suen lawsuit (Macau). What's that litigation be, around 10 years already?

      It's difficult to fight an opponent that while they can't print the money, has a nearly endless supply to fight as long as they desire.

      Delete
  8. He's probably smart enough to see the HOA work drying up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thoughts? NRS 645.0445(2) says that the NRS on agents and brokers does not apply to the "(c) The services rendered by an attorney at law in the performance of his or her duties as an attorney at law." Does that mean I can act as an agent for a client on a real estate transaction? Does it change if the client is a family member?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Been down this road several times. Client has big $$ commercial property listed for sale with broker. Deal terms are hashed out, but buyer and seller want attorneys to document deal instead of using the brokers form agreement. We draft the contract and charge a % of sale price to cover fees, this is deducted from the commissions that are due the broker. Brokers hate it, but the client should not have to pay twice to get a decent contract.

      Delete
    2. @4:29, I think on a purely technical point, it is illegal for the broker to split the commission with a non-licensee (much like an attorney fee splitting with a non-attorney). That being said, there is nothing that I can think of that regulates (other than perhaps rules of professional conduct regarding unreasonable fees) what an attorney and their client negotiate as the fee for the attorney's services, nor the client contracting with the broker as to which of them is responsible for paying for the legal fees necessary to effectuate the sale.

      Bottom line... Attorney gets paid for legal fees rather than commission for the sale..

      Delete
  10. At least one of the applications seems to be in technical violation of the Rules of the Nevada Commission on Judicial Selection (Revised 1/5/2017).

    The Application Instructions include this: "The applicant is responsible for ensuring the completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of each Application. You will not be notified if the Application is incomplete."

    Interested to see if Commission actually enforces the Rules for a technical violation and tosses any Applications.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stop being sly. Tell us who. We don't want to read all pages looking for your rule violation. Just say what it is goofball.

      Delete
    2. Levy filed for both seats. Apparently did not read the new rules....

      Delete
    3. They only listed her for Dept X.

      Delete
  11. Terry Coffing gets Department X.

    Department XVIII is a shitshow of candidates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Terry Coffing gets the nod for publicly admitting that none of the pleadings or motions that carried his name for the last 5 years were actually primarily written by him. Wonder if the billing records support that statement...

      Delete
    2. I don't think TAC has written anything in 10 years or more. Who cares? He is sharp, honorable and has seen it all. Fine qualities in a judge. If only someone could convince him to stop wearing those loafers. Fashionister.

      Delete
    3. TAC is by far the best choice on that list. Probably the only one on that list who will actually be taking a pay cut for the job.

      Delete
    4. I met Phil when I was an extern at the U.S. Attorney's Office. I only spoke with him a handful of times, and I only worked with him once, but I think he's a bright, civic- and family-minded guy.

      I spoke with JP once when I was trying to get the DA's office to take a case (it didn't). He seemed like he'd be a good judge too.

      I hope one of those two get XVIII.

      Delete
    5. After the Eric Johnson experience, enough with the Federal guys seeking appointment to the State Bench. You want a state judgeship? Practice in State Court.

      Delete
    6. In fairness, Phil worked at the DA's office before moving to the feds.

      Delete
    7. In fairness, he worked there for 4 years.

      Delete
    8. I used to work for Coffing and I honestly have only good things to say about him. He's smart, professional and easy to work with. He'd make a great judge.

      Delete
    9. The idea that you have to be taking a pay cut to make a good judge is absurd. Pretty much every lawyer at Akerman/Snell/Lewis & Roca/Greenberg Traurig/Ballard Spahr is making more than pretty much every lawyer at the DA's office/PD's office/AG's office/USAO. Do you think the first year lawyer at Akerman is better than the 10 year vet at the PD's office with 50 trials under his/her belt? Hardly. Sometimes civic-minded people take jobs that pay less than they could commend on the free market.

      (In case you're going to claim bias, this is coming from a 5th year "litigator" that has never had a trial, but makes well over 200k per year).

      Delete
  12. But who decided to put her in 10 instead of 18? If I am up for dept 10 how is that fair? Maybe the rule is different in california where she spent her career

    ReplyDelete
  13. The appointment slate for Dept. 18 is no better than the typical slate for the election to fill an open judicial seat.

    We all know excellent attorneys who are likely to make excellent judges, but they never apply for an appointment, or run for office. Perhaps they are simply doing too well financially as attorneys, or perhaps they are not comfortable with the very public lobbying, and fund raising, that accompanies becoming a judge and retaining such seat. Even those who are appointed eventually have to run for election and re-election and engage in fund-raising and other practices they may not be comfortable with.

    I'm not sure what it is. All I know is that the really good attorneys, who I believe have the skill set to be good judges, seem to never consider seeking the position.

    ReplyDelete