Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Kevin Williams

Clark County District Court Hearing Master Kevin Williams died in his home Tuesday morning. The 51-year-old judicial officer passed away in his sleep.

Williams became the District Court's first criminal arraignment hearing master in 2006. He previously served as a Clark County public defender for 16 years. Williams began his career as a law clerk in 1989.

Our hearts go out to Kevin's friends and family. Please use this thread only for condolences, well-wishes and stories about Kevin.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

How Very Appealing ...


Oh, no ... she's hot? This changes everything.

Crusader of justice Amber Candaleria has filed her undoubtedly meritorious appeal with the Nevada Supreme Court which seeks to remedy the absolute injustice that has been thrust upon her by the evil Judge James Bixler.

Equal Protection, "bar years," whatever it takes ... let's just get her on the bench. Sorry Bernie, we love the bow tie, but come on - look at her!


Candaleria had this to say about how she expects her pending appeal to affect her candidacy:
"For now, the appeal will take most of my time and energy," she said in an e-mail. "It is quite close to the primary, but I am hopeful that the appeal can be heard quickly and in time to protect the voters' fundamental right to vote for the candidate of their choice. This process has by no means been easy, but I believe in what I am doing and that I am the most qualified candidate. I have dedicated my career to public service and access to justice. To this end, my resolve cannot be shaken."
You go girl with your qualifications ... shake that resolve!

(LVRJ; Thanks, Tipster!)

Monday, March 29, 2010

Tea Party in Tea-rouble

Well, it started off good.

On Saturday, Sarah Palin and 10,000 members of the so-called Tea Party descended on Senator Harry Reid's hometown of Searchlight to show their unsupport for anything Reid-like.

However, on Sunday the Clark County District Attorney announced that it would be seeking a felony arrest warrant for Scott Ashjian, the Tea Party's controversial candidate for Reid's Senate Seat.

Ashjian is facing felony theft and bad check charges that allege he bounced a $5,000 business check in Las Vegas last year. Current Justice Court Department 14 candidate and head of the Clark County DA's bad check unit, Bernie Zadrowski, will reportedly be filing the charges today.

Earlier this past week, the "Independent American Party" (source of the picture above) filed a lawsuit in Carson City that challenges Ashjian’s membership in the Tea Party of Nevada. Documents filed with the lawsuit appear to show that Ashjian changed his voter registration on March 2, the day after he filed his declaration of candidacy.

Ashjian is one of 22 candidates who will be running for Harry's seat this election term.

Friday, March 26, 2010

Friday Open Thread

Happy Friday everyone!

Not that it has anything to do with Nevada legal gossip, but this Lawyer Coloring Book made us laugh (via ATL).

Bixler Declines to Recognize "Bar Years"

Justice of the peace candidate Amber Lynn Candelaria lost her bid to stay on the June primary election ballot Wednesday after District Court Judge James Bixler held that NRS 4.010 was "convoluted," but not unconstitutional.

Candelaria was represented pro bono by Kolesar & Leatham's Alan Lefebvre and Lewis & Roca's Dan Polsenberg, who plan to take Bixler's decision to the Supremes on appeal. They argued, inter alia, that the language of the statute was vague and the Nevada Legislature should have defined the term "years" ... whatever the hell that means.

The pertinent part of NRS 4.010 reads:
2. A justice of the peace must have a high school diploma or its equivalent as determined by the State Board of Education and:
(a) In a county whose population is 400,000 or more, a justice of the peace in a township whose population is 100,000 or more must be an attorney who is licensed and admitted to practice law in the courts of this State at the time of his or her election or appointment and has been licensed and admitted to practice law in the courts of this State, another state or the District of Columbia for not less than 5 years at any time preceding his or her election or appointment.
Seems like "licensed and admitted to practice law ... for not less than five years" is pretty clear to us.

Candelaria, a Boyd graduate who was admitted to practice in October of 2006, argued that she had five years experience based upon our State Bar's method of calculating bar dues. In her column yesterday, JAM responded to this argument quite nicely:
To rely on a bill from an organization that merely wants to squeeze every last dime of dues out of an attorney is silly.
Amen to that, Sista!

Bixler agreed with JAM, but put it a bit softer, stating “I’m an expert at strained construction, but if I adopted what you said I should be run over.” Bixler also noted that the fact the State Bar charges attorneys for an entire year instead of on a pro-rated basis “doesn’t matter. The day you are admitted is your [attorney] birthday.”

We understand the argument. In fact, we're pretty sure that Candelaria's "bar years" argument was initially posted in the comments of our humble little rag. However, is it really necessary to take this matter to our Supreme Court so that a woman with next to no legal experience can have a chance to become a judge? All meritorious legal arguments aside, isn't that law there to protect us?

Thanks to all who sent this in!

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Showdown!

Looks like there's a little scuffle a-brewin' up north ... and it ain't gonna be pretty.

On one side, Governor Jim Gibbons, who thinks the newly passed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will be bad for Nevada. Gibbons wants to try to stop enforcement of the bill by either joining forces with other state Attorney Generals or by going it alone through the Nevada Attorney General's office.

On the other side, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, who wants to read the legislation and wait for a reconciliation bill aimed at refining it to pass, before deciding whether or not to take legal action.

Yesterday, Gibbons threw down the gauntlet and directed Masto to sue. Masto claimed that her approval is required for the state to take any legal action, and that no action will be taken. In support of her position, Masto relies upon NRCP Rule 11 and is reportedly also relying upon NRS 228.110(1):
The Attorney General and the duly appointed deputies of the Attorney General shall be the legal advisers on all state matters arising in the Executive Department of the State Government.
In the Governor's corner, NRS 228.170(1):
Whenever the Governor directs or when, in the opinion of the Attorney General, to protect and secure the interest of the State it is necessary that a suit be commenced or defended in any federal or state court, the Attorney General shall commence the action or make the defense.
Looks to us like Masto has an uphill battle on her hands. One of our tipsters made the following observation:
To me, that sounds like the attorney ignoring the client's specific direction, but maybe I'm wrong.
Doesn't sound like too bad of an analogy to us, what do you guys think? How is this "showdown" likely to end?

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Del Vecchio Making a Run for DA

Lucky Nye County residents have one hell of a choice to make this election season. Apparently Nye has had some issues with their current District Attorney. District Attorney Bob Beckett was involved in two car wrecks on June 15, 2008, after which Beckett was arrested for drunk driving but pleaded guilty in Barstow, Calif., to misdemeanor reckless driving. Yes, this is the current DA.

Well, Las Vegas resident Nicholas Anthony Del Vecchio, a former Clark County family court judge removed by the Commission on Judicial Discipline in 2008, thinks he could do better for Nye. Del Vecchio was removed from office after he admitted to having sex in hotels with a female staff member during working hours and made sexually suggestive remarks to another. He was also charged with inappropriate remarks to a Hispanic bailiff and a black employee.

The Order removing him said, "Judge Del Vecchio's pervasive and unhealthy fixation on sex and sexual innuendo in the workplace is both evident and objectionable. His repeated behavior was so boorish and crude as to be unimaginable in any employment setting, much less a court of law." If that ain't DA material, we don't know what is!

When asked about his past removal from office during an interview, Del Vecchio had this to say:
"The current DA was popped for two DUIs, so I guess it's up to the voting public to decide which one of the wrongdoings I guess is more severe, number one. Number two, I will say I admit what I did, I apologize for what I did, and I attended and completed counseling. This is America the land of second chances. I knew it was going to come up. It's just one of those things and there's no way around it. You could certainly question my sanity, stepping back into the public light again."
We certainly can, and will ... you crazy bastard! That's exactly what the public wants to do when choosing a DA - pick the one with the least severe criminal history.

Luckily there is a second choice for Nye residents. A decent candidate with no apparent criminal history named Brian Kunzi has also entered the race. We're pulling for ya, Brian. Where do we send the donations?

(Pahrump Valley Times; Thanks Tipster!)

Monday, March 22, 2010

Supremes Reject State Bar's Wrist-Slappery

It looks like our Supremes might be sending a little message to the State Bar. The Court has rejected the recommendation of the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board that Philip Singer be disbarred for three years and repay $67,334 to eight clients. The board also said Singer must submit to binding arbitration on $32,200 in dispute.

According to the LV Sun, Singer admitted to stealing "mishandling" close to $100,000 of his clients' funds. He pled guilty to 14 counts of bar violations and admitted to 59 violations involving misappropriation of funds and failure to communicate with his clients. He also pled guilty to lack of competence and diligence and lack of candor and cooperation with the State Bar.

The Supremes viewed the State Bar's proposed punishment as "inadequate to protect the public." We'd have to check Brooklyn Law School's tuition to see if Singer qualifies for the WWL bright-line rule, but regardless we say good for the Supremes for finally taking a stand against the ridiculously underwhelming punishments SBN has been considering lately.

However, to our disappointment, the Supremes only requested an additional two years of disbarment and 15 hours of ethics CLEs. Not exactly hard-hitting. What do you guys think? Where should the line be for permanent disbarment in this state?

(LV Sun, Thanks Tipster!)

Friday, March 19, 2010

Oh, Kurt Harris...

As WWL is not endorsing candidates, this post is not meant to sway your decision on the elections or any specific candidate's abilities as a judge. I thought it was funny and wanted to share.
You probably think that writers for WWL get invitations to all of the best parties. Maybe Joe does, but I don't. Imagine my delight when I checked my email this evening and I see that I received an email from judicial candidate Kurt Harris two days ago. Inviting me to a Meet and Greet! It wasn't even a trick to find out who I am. I know it wasn't because there have to be at least 100 other people's emails listed. So many emails that I got bored reading them. I'm pretty sure that I have his entire judicial mailing list. Don't worry, Kurt, I'm not going to do anything with the list. I'm a very ethical lady.

If that's all that happened, I would shrug and say who cares. But no. One of the readers was kind enough to hit reply to all with the following very expressive message. Enjoy.

WHO IS THE DIP SH*T GIVING OUT THESE EMAILS????
F*CK YOU KURT HARRIS!!! IT'S CALLED BCC


Friday Open Thread

... and thus ends WWL Hollywood week, 2010.

This one's all you commenters - discuss whatever you'd like.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Guess He Didn't Liker ...

There's been quite a buzz around here lately about the "NFL Tough, Stanford Smart" Tony Liker, who also happens to be running for judge in Department S.

Well, Tony's flushing the judicial misconduct from his system early - you know, so he won't be tempted once he actually takes the bench. He reportedly disappeared Sunday night after (allegedly) trying to run over his wife in his car.

The argument reportedly started as a domestic dispute, when Mr. NFL Tough decided to go all vehicular on his bride. Mrs. Liker was taken to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries; Tony is still at large as of this writing.

Tony was previously arrested on a domestic violence charge a couple of years ago after fighting with a roommate. When asked about the incident while running for judge, he said it was dismissed after authorities reviewed the facts of the case.

A helpful Tipster reminded us that Tony once wanted to start a TV show starring him as a judge who boxed defendants in domestic violence cases. We posted about the story a while back, but we thought this would be a good time to revisit, what with Vegas lawyers going Hollywood now.

If you find yourself a little heavy on billables today, here's .5 you'll never get back:








Stay classy, Tony Liker.

(Thanks Tipsters!)

***UPDATE***
Channel 13 is reporting that Liker is no longer "at large," but has yet to be questioned by police. They also have some additional information about the incident.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Meet the Candidates: Department 27

We've finished the departments that are facing primary elections. We did receive a response from a candidate in one of the non-primary departments, so we will post that today. Here it is:

Nancy Allf

1. I want to be a judge because I'm hard working, have a good moral compass, have significant legal experience to offer in service to the community and want to be a part of the team that delivers justice to this community I love so much. I feel I can make a difference to the litigants who would come before me by applying the law fairly and evenly to everyone and treating all parties with respect.

2. I am qualified to be a judge based upon judicial, legal and leadership experience. I have served for several years as an appointed judge in all four levels of court in Nevada. I have worked as a lawyer for over 26 years in large, medium and small firms and have tried all sorts of civil cases. I have risen to leadership in every legal organization in which I've become involved as a volunteer. I have good common sense, a strong work ethic and a good understanding of the role of judges in the justice system.

3. In preparation of this answer, I did briefly review the site, but had been generally unfamiliar with it, or any other blogs out there about Las Vegas lawyers or the practice of law in Las Vegas before now. You have piqued my interest.

Blaine Beckstead - No Response Received

Must See T.V.

Norm Clarke over at the RJ is reporting that CBS is making a pilot "loosely" based on Las Vegas lawfirm Cristalli & Saggese. The firm is probably best known for the 2004 acquittal it won for (alleged) murderer Sandy Murphy.

The pilot's director also directed Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." We have no idea if that's good or bad.

Jerry O'Connell is supposedly on board to play Marc Saggese, while Michael Cristalli got stuck with Jim Belushi playing his character.

Belushi? Really? We would have gone with Jimmy Kimmel ourselves. Maybe he wasn't available.

We're not sure what makes Cristalli & Saggese so unique as to deserve a television show based on the firm. Although, looking at their website, they do seem to have quite a few good-looking staff members.

(LVRJ; Thanks, Tipster!)

Friday, March 12, 2010

Friday Open Thread

Happy Friday! Thanks for your comments on our judicial posts over the past couple of weeks.

Elle did a great job behind the scenes, and hopefully the candidate responses (and ensuing comments) helped those of you who don't practice in a particular area to make more informed decisions come election time.

This thread's all you. Fell free to discuss the candidates or whatever else tickles your fancy.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Meet the Candidates: Department T

[Note from Elle: I take full responsibility for the formatting of Terrance Marren's responses. I received a very nicely formatted Word Document. Blogger has turned that into something very strange and it will not go back to normal. If I retype it, then it will be full of typing errors. So, here is the wonky format. Blame me, not the candidate.]

John Jensen
- No response received

Terrance Marren
Campaign Website: http://www.terrancemarren.com


1. Why do you want to be a judge? Why should people re-elect you?

I listed both questions, because my situation is somewhat unique. I was first elected as a Family Court Judge for Department A in 1992 when the first six judicial judges of the Family Court were elected. I had worked as Nevada’s first full-time Senior Domestic Relations Referee for the seven years prior to my election.


After twelve years as a Senior Domestic Relations Referee and a Family Court Judge, I left the position of District Court Judge to become the City of Mesquite’s first full-time City Attorney. Upon my retirement as Mesquite’s City Attorney in 2005, I was immediately recalled to service by the Nevada Supreme Court as an appointed Senior District Court Judge, a position I still hold. I work by assignment of the Nevada Supreme Court, which has averaged from about half time to three-quarter time since my appointment.


Department T will be the 20th department of the Clark County Family Court. I want to be elected again as a full-time Family Court Judge to become involved in the day-to-day operation of a judicial department. I want to be involved in the review, formation and amendment of the forms, rules and policies of the Clark County Family Court to make the Court even more meaningfully accessible to the attorneys and parties accessing our Court, our customers.


I want to be elected to the Family Court again because I have a great deal of institutional knowledge about the work done in the Family Court and I enjoy that work very much. I believe I have my knowledge, experience and demeanor will make me a valuable resource to the twenty-member Court.


Finally, I believe I should be elected to another Family Court Judgeship due to my experience in the settlement of cases during the past five years. I have been trained, by training and experience, to assist parties in settling their cases without contested hearings. I completed the National Judicial College 40-hour Civil Mediation Course in 2008.

My primary assignment as a Senior District Court Judge for most of the past five years is as a Settlement Judge for the Family Court. A Settlement Judge assists parties, represented or not, in settling their disputes on their own. Recently, with another settlement judge, I completed a five-week settlement conference; our success rate exceeded 75% of all cases submitted for settlement.

2. Why are you qualified to be a judge? What have you achieved while in office?

Again, I answered both questions since I was previously elected to Department A of the Family Court.


I believe I am qualified to be elected due to my training and education. I am the most experienced candidate in my race. I ask that voters review the qualifications of all five contestants for Department T. Most of the candidates have websites containing information about them.


As Nevada’s first Domestic Relations Referee and later Senior Domestic Relations Referee from 1986 through 1992, I was the first member of what evolved into the Clark County Family Court. All of the procedures, rules, forms and policies now used in the Family Court had their inception in my courtroom. As the Court grew by two additional referees, then initially six elected Family Court Judges, later more and now judges 19 and 20, the Court continued and continues to evolve.


In 1990, as a Senior District Court Judge, I formed a group of professionals from various disciplines with the permission of the Chief Judge which evolved into the Southern Nevada Domestic Violence Task Force. The group included judges, prosecutors, lawyers, police, counselors, public members and others. This was an important step in addressing domestic violence in our community, including domestic violence resulting in lethality of one party by another.


I received a judicial complaint in 1997. The Complaint Number was No. 9702-215. The charge of the Judicial Discipline Commission involved a complaint by a party alleging, correctly, that a matter was submitted to me for decision and the decision was not made until over 10 months later. The Commission also raised two additional cases where long delays occurred from submission to decision. This is all part of the public record as contained in the decision of the Commission.

The Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission, when going forward with the complaint, conducted a private hearing to determine whether sufficient evidence existed to justify a Public Hearing. At the conclusion of the presentation of the case at the private hearing, the Commission decided to proceed to a Public Hearing. A Public Hearing was scheduled before the Commission.

There were many arguable reasons as why my decisions in the three cases noted by the Commission were not promptly resolved. The caseload of each judge in the initial six-member Court was among the highest in the nation. I made thousands of case decisions from the date of my employment as a Senior Domestic Relations Referee and election as a Family Court Judge up to this complaint being brought to my attention.


But the fact remained that the complainant and the parties in the two other referenced cases waited too long for my decisions. Additionally, the buck stopped at my desk and I had ultimate responsibility for any deficiencies arising in my department. So, I stipulated to the institution of discipline against me without the necessity for a contested Public Hearing. The Commission imposed a public reprimand and imposed a fine of $1,000.00 which I paid to the Clark County Law Library. While it was incredibly embarrassing to me personally and professionally, I thought it was important to take responsibility for the situation.

I have always thought my stipulation to discipline without public hearing was refreshing. I know it was the right thing to do at the time and now. And I heard a hard lesson. I implemented a procedure for insuring no case would be “lost” for timely decision. I have implemented this system during my service as a Senior District Court Judge.

It should also be noted that the Commission filed a second complaint against me during the pendency of the first complaint. That complaint, No. 9801-215, was dismissed by the Commission due to lack of sufficient evidence to proceed to Public Hearing. The prosecutor in that case recommended to the Commission that the case be dismissed.

The Nevada Supreme Court found me to be fit and qualified to be commissioned as a Senior District Court Judge the Family Court upon my retirement five years ago and ever since that time. Also, the Executive Director of the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline at the time of my discipline and second complaint, Leonard Gang, Esq., is a supporter of my current campaign for Department T.


All of the foregoing qualifies me to be elected to Department T of the Family Division, in my opinion.


3.

Do you read Wild Wild Law? If so, what do you think of the site?

I began reading Wild Wild Law recently when I was contacted by your organization. I found it interesting and informative and I will contact reading it from this point forward. Judges should keep up with public opinion in order to evaluate current procedures and practices in the Family Court.


Michelle "Shell" Mercer - No response received

Gayle Nathan

1. Why do you want to be a judge?

I have been practicing law for going on 21 years now. In my family law practice I have helped thousands of families. I understand the needs and the dynamics of our valley's families. I see the need for jurists who have the depth and insight that I have gained in my practice, to be on the bench. We need Family Court Judges who are in touch with our families and understand their needs. I have that depth and insight; I care about what happens to the families that pass through Family Court.

2. Why are you qualified to be a judge?

I have represented thousands of people through my 21 years of practicing law and have had over one thousand trials and/or evidentiary hearings. I have taken up 16 cases on appeal and writs, have argued cases before the Nevada Supreme Court en banc and before three judge panels. I not only bring this wealth of family law experience to the bench, but also my experience practicing criminal law, bankruptcy law and civil law which is touched upon in the family courts from time to time.

Having been an employer with my own firm for 15 years, I also understand business law and the banking and tax implications that so often tie into the divorce cases we litigate.

I sit as an alternate Child Support Hearing Master and as a Justice of the Peace Pro Tem in North Las Vegas Justice Court which demonstrates that I have the confidence of judges to place me on the bench.

I have been placed on the list of assigned counsel for Abuse/Neglect Court so this has become an important area of practice that has been added to my legal resume this past year.

3. Do you read Wild Wild Law? If so, what do you think of the site?

I am familiar with Wild Wild Law; I believe it is important for the voters to have a forum that provides a fair and intelligent view of the judicial candidates. Your readers may read more about my credentials for Family Court Judge on GayleNathanLaw.com

Carl Piazza - No response received