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!)
So she's appealing.
ReplyDeleteNo qualifications at all. That should be her campaign slogan.
ReplyDeleteBut, she's quite doable.
And so what; we've had lots of idiots on the Justice Court bench over the years. She's just be carrying on that proud tradition.
GOOD GOD how the hell can you be more qualified than ANY other candidate...IN THWE WORLD at this point! How many trials? How many times in front of the supreme court...YOURSELF, not hired guns.....how many years writing motions, examining witnesses, negotiating deals, presenting evidence, objecting in court....oh....yeah...NONE. She PUSHED PAPER to unrepresented, predominately family court parties. So, lay out this long list of qualifications that makes you ahead of the other contenders?????? IDIOT! ASHE IS AN IDIOT...and hey, hot now, but you can morph that pic in your mind and aging is not going to go well for those jowls or that nose.
ReplyDeleteIf Dan Polsenberg is doing the appeal, what is taking up her time in the next few weeks?
ReplyDelete8:26AM my thought as well, unless she is filing the appeal herself...
ReplyDeleteI posted the other day regarding some of the arguments raised in her case and most are stretched pretty thin IMHO. Certainly I think there are a couple of tweeks that could have been made to that statute (i.e. make it universal for all JP's, irrespective of county size) and apparently defining in more specfic detail how to establish the five year licensing requirement. The Supremes may fix those problems potentially.
I too tend to agree with the other 8:26AM, I mean if she had practiced in Justice Court for even a couple of years that would be SOME real experience that is tangible, but to have never had one case or client you have actually represented in ANY Nevada Court at ANY level is shocking. To suggest that running the self-hurt center provides the same level of legal experience as actually having to go into court argue motions, do a jury or bench trial, etc., is scary.
For her year level, she is also one of the best paid public attorneys in town. Just type in her name at http://transparentnevada.com
ReplyDeleteHer pay grade is substantially better than a comparable D.A. or P.D. with the same amount of years.
Regarding the JP's in smaller counties. I had a bench trial in the rurals and the JP was a non-lawyer. Had NO clue about the law and most basic criminal rights or the responsibilities of law enforcement. That being said, there simply are not many lawyers who are in those areas that would take those jobs. They just do not live in those small communities.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to report that 8:26 has had a stroke... and a heart attack... and his car blew a gasket too.
ReplyDelete$121,512.04 per year to work in a legal self-help office. Who did she blow?
ReplyDelete@9:15
ReplyDeleteeveryone with the proper equipment and a few without, apparently.
Dan Polsenberg maybe???
If she is unsuccessful in her appeal, will her response be, "But I was a CHEERLEADER!?" (Fling ponytail and walk away.)
ReplyDelete9:15 Holy cow. I wonder what private practice would pay for the same amount of work product?
ReplyDelete@ 9:12
ReplyDeleteTouche! That was funny. (I am 8:26).
AND my panties caught on fire!
9:05,
ReplyDeleteI hear you -- that is an issue in the rurals.
But one of the best judges I have encountered in NV at any level or location is a non-lawyer JP. It happens...
$121,512.04!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteHoly fu@*ing cow!!!!
She does nothing!
I need a new job.
You should have seen her "cozying up" to the law professors.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling she's used to getting her way.
If she wins her appeal, I think I'll file suit next election cycle so I can run for JP. After all, if a non-lawyer can be JP in NLV and the rural counties, why shouldn't I be allowed to be a JP in LV? At least I've been to trials, and done the grunt work that the attorneys don't want to do to get cases ready for trial.
ReplyDelete-A Paralegal
P.S. Two words about attorneys who have never had clients but run for judge: Elizabeth Halverson.
It actually appears she is one of the lowest-paid "Attorney II"-class employees of Clark County. I used to think public sector attorneys had poor pay. Not after looking at that link.
ReplyDeleteThe $121,512.04 actually includes about $27,111.31 in accrued benefits. Her base salary is$94,400.73. Still not bad, considering that in 2008, equivalent second year D.A.s and P.D.s were making in the upper 60k or lower 70k range.
ReplyDeletePublic Sector is very broad...Look at the sal. of teh Attorney General.....compare it to DA's in this county.......
ReplyDeleteUhm, she's not hot. Perhaps she's semi "lawyer hot," but this is a far cry from being "hot" as a member of the general populace. Also, throwing your name in for judge at her level shows exceptionally poor judgment. Sorry sweetie, just go away.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it with the people in government lawyer jobs thinking that they are somehow qualified to run for judge simply because they punched the government clock for 5-10 years?! I will take someone who has earned their stipes in private practice over a government attorney any day, and I say this having many friends who are government lawyers. It is just a much different and more qualifying experience to be in private practice.
Hot enough for her bailiff to not cop an attitude about rubbing her feet I guess.
ReplyDelete"Public Sector is very broad...Look at the sal. of teh Attorney General.....compare it to DA's in this county......."
ReplyDeleteStarting is good, but AGs top out significantly lower than DAs.
Chiefs, as in those directly under the AG, seem top out around $115k.
http://transparentnevada.com/salaries/search/?name=&title=deputy+general&year=2008&jurisdiction=&sort_by=T
@12:47,
ReplyDeleteI don't think she's been referred to as "hot" (except by 8:26, and only in contrast to future horse jowls). I think she's been referred to as "doable." A world of difference.
Great post Joseph W. Law. Running for JP made her a public official but appealing such a common sense ruling exposed her to ridicule. Then, making the statement that her experience somehow qualified her for the position just pushed it over the top.
ReplyDelete$115k ain't so bad when you are in your car and headed for home every day at 5:01 p.m.
ReplyDelete@1:47
ReplyDeletemost DA's/AG's I know, at least in crim, are at their desks before civil attorney's even know the sun is up. I always laugh when civil attorneys decide to take a crim case for a corp. client and call me to ask if they can move the 7:30 hearing to the afternoon....too early for them. I tell them to see how the judge feels about that. Furthermore, though most don't have to bill like civil, most work long a=days as well. AND at 115 topping out, it is not that great at all for the years/hours invested. And to the one who posted that CIVIL experience is better than PUBLIC LAW experience....what a stupid statement. Either CAN be well qualified depending on whether they have seen a court room. Judges NEED experience in the court with motions, evidence, and procedure as well as jury and trial experience. There are exceptions, but if the goal is to make a better judiciary, nothing beats Italian leather on the ground, in the courtroom.
2:55 should run for judge.
ReplyDeleteDid she run for County Commissioner against Chris G. last go round too?
ReplyDeleteI love Amber. If she is elected maybe one day my Alan Shore Judge Weldon (minus the blond hair) fantasy will come true.
ReplyDeleteShe's got a weird body. Not unattractive, not fat, but sort of "sturdy."
ReplyDeleteGood breeding hips, if you know what I mean.
No disrespect. You make yourself a public figure, people start picking you apart.
7:42 - that being said, she probably has jacked up teeth, or she wouldn't be smiling with her mouth shut.
ReplyDeletei'd hit that
ReplyDelete@3:49-
ReplyDeleteNo, you're thinking of another politically inept idiot, Priscella Marie Flores. She was Nevada Stupak's shill in his attempt to run for Chris G's Commission seat, but HE was too dumb to know you had to chose your political party before Jan 1st of the year you're running.
Wow. This has me thinking... we sure do have a bunch of stupids running for public office!
Really? In 2010 this discussion has devloved into a discussion of her appearance? Since when is being hot a qualification?
ReplyDeleteIf the candidate was a man, would we be talking about his beer gut or if he was "doable"? Isn't there enough about this story to criticize without going into her "sturdy" build and "birthing hips." She's holding herself out as a candidate for a public office, not Miss America or Playboy Bunny. So glad I got out of Vegas.
@ 8:54. Get a grip. If you think that the HOT comment was ever serious we are glad you got out too. We don't need hollier than thou types here and yes, if it were a guy they would be. Hafen gets criticized, Liker gets criticized, Del Vecchio gets criticized regarding appearance all the time. Fall UNDER you high horse.
ReplyDeleteThis ain't the Harvard Law Review, sir. You come here to be entertained, not to be enlightened. Read some of the prior comments about Stefany Miley.
ReplyDeleteAll of that said, Amber sure is "doable". And I'm a straight woman.
if 8:54 "got out of vegas," why is 8:54 commenting on this blog?
ReplyDelete9:13 for the win!
ReplyDeleteSorry, not familiar with the word "hollier."
ReplyDeleteShe's not stupid. She's trying to trade getting off work at 5:01 pm to getting off work at 11:01 am. She just tried a year too soon.
ReplyDelete"Disbarment for life"?!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lvrj.com/news/lv-attorney-s-disbarment-for-life-urged-89583412.html
I would tap her, too, but I don't know if I would want her ruling on my cases. Call me old-fashioned, but women are generally ill-equipped to be judges. It takes a Man's testosterone-fueled dispassionate intelligence to render justice. I think Amber should focus less on trying to get some high-paying job on easy street. As a doable woman she does not have to make a lot of money, she can just marry a man who has it. A far more civilized way to go.
ReplyDeleteDamn 3:01 - why didn't I think of that! Signed, a doable woman attorney stuck at work.
ReplyDelete@8:54, because she’s totally, utterly, completely UNDERqualified for the job. She’s a joke. What better to do with a bad joke than ridicule it?
ReplyDeleteWow. Just Wow. Shame on all of you for the nasty comments.
ReplyDelete3:01 PM has got to be a feminist troll.
ReplyDeleteIt is incredibly disappointing to see the way these comments have turned by people who are considered "professionals." If you disagree with Amber and her running for this office, fine- then stick to the issue. Just because she is a woman we have numerous comments talking about how "doable" she is...and no one would even think of asking who anyone "blew" to get this job if it were a man in the same position making the same pay... AND as someone who works for a female judge I DO NOT think women are "ill-equipped to be judges"...so 3:01 can take your testosterone and SHOVE IT!
ReplyDelete3:08 PM - I feel for you. Here's a good book that can set you on the right path. Good luck.
ReplyDeleteFor those who don't think looks matter when running for judge, please explain to me the campaign signs for Baucum (with clearly an old photo), Palm, and previously for Miley.
ReplyDeleteThe elected judiciary is a joke and turning in to a beauty pageant. If we keep electing judges we'll have the best looking bench in the country, but will they all be competent judges?
Here's a classic on settling for Mr. Good Enough. It's no secret that marriage is the key to happiness for a man and a woman. I feel bad for all the doable gals in the legal business who can't find a husband - and thus happiness - because they have unrealistic standards. Drop you standards and live blissfully ever after. (But don't drop them so low you will have trouble submitting to your husband, because submission is the foundation upon which marriage is built.)
ReplyDeleteOk, as a Boyd grad who admittedly tends to get snitty about unfounded Boyd-bagging, I can say that she is an embarassment to the school and only feeds the Boyd-baggers. Sigh...
ReplyDelete@8:01,
ReplyDeleteAs one has has bagged many a Boyd, I can say that I'd be happy to add her to my Boyd-bagged list.
3:01
ReplyDeleteLemme just say:
Thatcher, Peron, Ghandi, Aquino, Meir, Robinson, Bhutto, Campbell, McAleese, Elizabeth II, Beatrix, ... and that list is a scrape to the surface!
@ 4:44
ReplyDeleteIs your Judge doable?
@8:25 AM
ReplyDeleteOh please.
Paris Hilton, Stefany Miley, Britney Spears, Nancy Saita, Lindsay Lohan, Nancy Reagan, Pamela Anderson, Sarah Palin, Jenny McCarthy, Ann Coulter, Elizabeth Halverson.
Scrape that!
Like, everywhere, such as . . .
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww
@9:05
ReplyDeleteMost of your list is celebrity, not leadership. That goes to show you never really read the book towhich you point for all of us to gain our understanding of who is suited for leqading. Furthermore, your lists reveals an affinity for TMZ, not reality.
EAT that.
@ 8:36 a.m.
ReplyDeleteI sincerely doubt that YOU are doable...
I still "wonder" how Stephanie Miley, got on the bench, either time? Amazes me, how voter's don't understand the complete background of "practicing of law", for the candidates that they vote into a department.
ReplyDeleteI can't wait, four years from now ~ to see who goes against Miley. Maybe, her department will file ethic complaints against her, and we will see a repeat of "judges past". One can only wish ~ because Stephanie Miley needs to be removed from the bench!
@2:00
ReplyDelete8:36 here. That's not what your judge told me last night!
@ 8:36
ReplyDelete2:00 p.m. here
I'm a law clerk for a male judge, not to be confused with the person who posted a comment earlier about working for a female judge.
Are you using this forum to come out? What exactly did my judge say to you last night???
4:44 here
ReplyDeletewow...guess 8:36 took "shoving his testosterone" a little too literally...(sorry, too easy)
8:36 here.
ReplyDeleteI'm a bi female. I did both your judges. Now get back to work law clerks, you're on the taxpayers dime.
Oh come on.... looks are it.
ReplyDeleteIf you have them you need nothing else and you too can be a judge.
Miley showed us all that. She is as stupid as they come. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb and she stayed with that big ole lump of a husband that loves to beat her and the dog.
She has it better! She doesn't wait until 5:01pm to get off work. She is promptly picking up her kids at 3:25pm at their school each day.
I want a job like that.
(Note to self: get plastic surgery to advance career.)
I used to work at Family Court and had personal experience with Amber and what she does. The bottom line is that Amber does NOTHING. She plays with paperwork that OTHER attorneys have already researched and drafted. She has NO EXPERIENCE with the actual practice of law. She shows up late and leaves early. Brings her dog to work with her. Screws around with her hair and makeup instead of doing her work. Flirts incessantly and is VERY unprofessional...if she were male she would probably be sued for sexual harrassment. Brags about how all the men she has ever worked with have "made comments" on her appearance. Dresses unprofessionally. Has major issues with depression. The list goes on and on. Not only is she legally unqualified to be a Justice, she would be the WORST choice even if she ran in two years when it was legal for her to do so. Do not vote for this (in my opinion) emotionally unstable and obviously ignorant person.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like this gal will fit in perfectly. A bunch of useless degenerates. May the people and bar of Nevada get the cretins it chooses.
ReplyDeleteNice how Amber made the cover of the latest issue of Nevada Lawyer as one of the "Leaders of Your Legal Community".
ReplyDeleteROLF
Do not underestimate Amber. Four years out of law school she has already convinced others to (1) give her a great County job in which she makes nearly $20,000.00 more than her same-year peers (which by the way also gives her the time to run for all of these positions), (2) elect her to the Board of Governors and (3) get Polsenberg to do her appeal. As to all of the comments about looks and qualifications, I remember the same type of comments being flung about when Miley first put up her billboards. Look at Miley now! I think Amber is definitely going places and she has already accomplished way more than most of us ever will. Does this topic win the award for Most WWL Comments ever?
ReplyDeleteThe Supremes ruled on the emergency appeal today at 1:30. Affirmed, 4-2, with Gibbons recusing himself. Looks like the brain trust made the right call, and Cherry and Saitta think five years does not equal 365 x 5.
ReplyDeleteI'd celebrate, but she'll just run in two years. Probably for the NV Supreme Court.
ReplyDeleteWho is that TOOL with the glasses sitting next to her? This must be the idiot that gets shoved and ordered around by Amber like the poor dog in the Grinch cartoon.
ReplyDeleteAnthony Wright says:
ReplyDeleteMay 15, 2010 at 11:03 pm
The NV Bar makes her pay the escalated bar dues of a five-year lawyer. The state bar seems to think she has five years behind her to make her pay the higher annual dues. If the policing body for lawyers thinks 39 months equals 60 months, then how can attorneys who are punished if they do not pay the dues say otherwise?