Wednesday, August 9, 2017

She Says


  • Judge Joe Hardy ordered the new owners of the Legacy Golf Course to maintain the status quo. [RJ]  Here's Erika Pike Turner explaining what happened. [via @Journalismsandy]
  • Danny Tarkanian, a Nevada licensed lawyer, is running agains Senator Dean Heller in the primary next year. [RJ]
  • Female lawyers can talk, too. [NY Times]

52 comments:

  1. Ah yes, Danny, a pro-trump candidate, whatever the hell that means. I suppose that's good if you want less checks and balances. As irritated as I was and continue to be by Heller, his greatest "crime" against the republican base was trying to offer the people of Nevada some actual representation in Nevada. I applaud Heller for that, regardless of political differences.

    context for "pro-trump" claim here: "In a statement, Tarkanian said he is 'proudly on the team of President Trump,'" https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/nevada/danny-tarkanian-to-run-for-us-senate-seat-held-by-dean-heller/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does that mean Pro-Yucca Mountain? Does that mean anti-marijuana? There are quite a few issues where "pro-Trump" means solidly anti-Nevada.

      Delete
    2. Danny will help Rosen win. Did he ever pay any of the multi-million dollar judgment or did he file BK?

      Delete
    3. Lou Toomin, Voldemort and Danny Tarkanian are all in the "Losing the most elections hall of shame."

      Delete
    4. Tarkanian is a joke.

      Delete
    5. Never paid a nickel of the Judgment. And I do not believe that he filed bankruptcy (because wasn't the Judgment for fraud and nondischargeable))

      Delete
    6. Love the fraud....so egregious....so rampant in this town.

      Delete
  2. "Single Female Lawyer, Fighting for her clients, Wearing sexy mini-skirts, And being self-reliant"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You win the blog for the day with that BB Rodriguez quote. Well played.

      Delete
  3. Danny boy, Trump's pipe is calling.

    “We’re never going to make America great again unless we have senators in office that fully support President Trump and his ‘America First’ agenda,” said Tarkanian

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tarkanian is good friends with the Johnsons. Keeping the Trump community tight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would Eric leave the bench for an appointment by Trump as US Attorney?

      Delete
    2. Barney Rubbel would fit right in any Trump cartoon cabinet.

      Delete
  5. No discussion about the lovelies over at the NSC lowering the standards of the bar? Vote all these asset out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This was discussed last week. Yes it is preposterous. But this from the same Nevada Supreme Court that in the last 10 days has turned out (between 7 justices): 4 Opinions, 1 Unpublished Decision, 1 Dismissal by the Court, 1 amended Unpublished Decision and 4 dismissals by the Clerk. Their productivity is atrocious. So to hear that they are OK with less stringent requirements for bar applicants while they are being less stringent on themselves is hardly surprising.

      Delete
    2. There was some discussion several days ago. Short version, it pissed everyone off (except the numerous out-of-state attorneys carpetbagger Laxalt hired at the AG's office).

      https://lasvegaslawblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/lowering-bar-little.html

      Delete
  6. Former Republican here. I hope Danny Tarkanian successfully "primaries" Dean Heller and then loses (AGAIN!) to Jacky Rosen. It would serve all the angry, bitter nutjobs in Trump's base right. Would be even funnier if the loss caused the Dems to take the Senate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is my issue with this opinion. Rosen beat Tarkanian 47/46 for a purely Clark County District. You now give Tarkanian the rest of the State of Nevada (largely very conservative except for Washoe) and Tarkanian probably reverses that result by 1-2 points. I think Tarkanian is an idiot but if the margins hold (and taking mid-term with a lunatic in the White House out of the equation) he might be able to take Rosen out.

      Delete
    2. 1:13 PM,

      1:04 PM here. That's good analysis, except for one tiny problem: Trump is shitting all over the GOP brand. In all special elections (state, federal) Democrats are out performing Republicans by about 14 points. This would give Rosen the decisive victory.

      https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-are-overperforming-in-special-elections-almost-everywhere/

      Plus, you have to factor in that Danny Tarkanian is the Jim Kelly of Nevada elections! ;-)

      Delete
    3. @1:13 You also need to factor in what is sure to be an ugly primary. Now that Tarkanian has opened the door, there will be at least a couple more republicans jump in the race and they will all try to see how far they can go to the right. Whoever wins the primary may be too bruised for the general. I am not necessarily a Rosen fan, but the GOP could hand the seat to her ala 2010 with Reid/Angle.

      Delete
    4. That district was an R+2 district before Rosen won it. It was previously held by a Republican, despite being a Clark County District. Also, it's only a portion of the Clark County metro area,which contains a lot of Democratic votes. So the theory in favor or Rosen is that 1.)there are more Democratic votes in the parts of Clark County not covered by her district than there are Republican votes out in the rural areas, 2.) As somebody who won in an Republican leaning district she's proven she's somebody who can peel away enough Independent/Republican voters to add to her base and eke out a win.
      I guess we'll see in 2018 if that theory is right.

      Delete
  7. Judges (like the author of the NYT article) talk the talk, but they rarely if ever walk the walk. This is along the lines of civility in the profession. Many judges love to grandstand about the issue, but they will never hold a badly behaving attorney to account--except, of course, when the bad behavior is aimed at them. Bottom line: judges have tons of influence--on the parties, the lawyers and definitely the jury. A judge deliberately and specifically acknowledging and demonstrating respect for a female attorney, junior or not, will change the entire dynamic of how that attorney interacts with every other person in that courtroom. What we see more of, however, a la Betsy Gonzalez, are judges who visibly exhibit disdain and contempt for women and younger/junior attorneys. Yet they have the gall to act all feminist-like in public. Ugh (yeah, yeah, female lawyer here; if you don't like reality, suck it)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those feminists are a product of the traditionalist "there is only one seat at the table for a woman" mind-set.

      Delete
    2. Betsy shits on everyone. Do not take it personally. Do not think that it is because you are a woman. With that said, do I generally see attorneys act more civil in front of her than they do in front of judges who let attorneys get away with murder? I do, because she seems to have earned at least a modicum of respect from attorneys. But don't think that her disdain and contempt is directed at you because you are a woman.

      Delete
    3. Female attorney here. I love Betsy. I have never felt that she was disrespectful to me in the least. She would actually be one of my preferences (except that she does business court).

      Delete
    4. 9:19 a.m. has gotten that kind of treatment because she is undoubtedly, shall we say, not as easy on the eyes as Betsy. isn't that the common denominator in whether Betsy is nice to a female lawyer?

      Delete
    5. No, not in my experience. That has nothing to do with it. Generally if you make Betsy feel like she is the smartest person in the room, then she is nice to you.

      Delete
  8. I am treated poorly by female judges for no reason, as a female. No favoritism do I feel toward me by the judges.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Judge Miley kills female attorneys. The better looking the female attorney, the harder Judge Steffy swings.

      Delete
    2. I'm a female attorney and I feel the exact opposite--I prefer the female judges and feel as though they treat me better in certain ways.

      Delete
  9. Cadish is an equal opportunity condescending judge to both men and women.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have been on the receiving end of Cadish's condescension, she definitely plays favorites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love Judge Cadish and don't believe she "plays favorites."

      Delete
    2. I don't espouse that she plays favorites, but it is because I am convinced that she really likes me.

      Delete
    3. Tim must be nice to you too.

      Delete
  11. Never thought gender was much of an issue in cases until we got all those female judges and female lawyers. Twenty years ago it did not matter if your attorney was male or female. Today it seems to matter. In some respects we have gone backwards. The old time female attorneys were effective and just did their job. Now it is like they have prove something and have a chip on their block. It is like dealing with LA attorneys all the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Old time female attorney here. 20 years ago gender didn't matter? Some male judges called us lawyerettes!

      Delete
    2. And some insisted that women wear skirts and pantyhose. There were plenty of asshole judges 20 years ago.

      Delete
    3. Old Man Morman Judges just like old Federal Court

      Delete
    4. Because the current Federal Court does not have old, white Mormon males? Yeah......

      Delete
  12. Seems like female judges draw way more criticism on this blog than male judges. I can't remember the last time I read that a male judge was condescending or disdainful. Yet there are some who definitely are. Before everyone jumps and says but female judges was the topic, when was the last time male judges was the topic?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Female attorney here. I have had judges where I can tell they prefer a certain gender of attorney so I'd send male attorneys to court in my stead when it would benefit the client. There are some judges I've seen who favor good looking attorneys (male or female) as if they think they'll fit in with the popular kids if they grant their motions. I'm really ugly so it has never been a benefit to me. What I make note of about all judges is one thing: if they are Mormon. Some very specific biases at play. Once had a male LDS judge chastise my pro bono DV client for allowing herself to be beaten by her soon to be ex. He told her it was her fault for going inside the house to do the child exchange and disregarded the assault in the divorce as a result.

      Delete
    2. 7:30 am-- I can answer that. We have had discussions about Scotti being an absolute nightmare. We have had discussions about Barney Rubble being a pro-prosecution prick. So you are welcome to discuss male judges being the topic.

      Delete
    3. Doug Smith Res Ipsa Loquitur. Used to be a great JP. what happened to him?

      Delete
    4. @7:30 am - maybe you don't visit this blog that often, but I constantly see criticisms of male judges too. Today it does seem like the women are getting the brunt of it but I don't think it's as lopsided as you say it is.

      Delete
    5. We haven't discussed how a certain male judge caused a divorce in the public defender's office because of an affair with one of the attorneys.

      Delete
    6. So discuss it.

      Delete
    7. Leuk is a prick. But that is awhile ago.

      Delete
    8. 10:30, yes, please discuss it.

      Delete
  13. Cadish does play favorites. Lost her coolness. I used to like her. Too bad. Maybe she Will find her fairness again.

    ReplyDelete
  14. At 10:30 Whaat? Do tell.

    ReplyDelete