Hope you all enjoyed the 8.0 (or the odd, mid-week day off ... depending on your circumstances) in honor of the brave men and women who fought for our country.
Anyone else have a problem with the new TSA image scanners at the airports and the enhanced patdowns? When did we abdicate all of our civil liberties and search protections to the TSA? Don't whine that by buying the ticket we accept the "inconvinence" argument. The airlines are govt subsidized failed business models, and none of the airports are owned by the feds, yet security is run by them.
i personally think maybe the www.optoutday.com idea has some merit, but as long as idiots believe terrorists are out to kill us all, then the courts will allow such invasions.
My main problem is I always get aroused when I get fondled. Like a fear boner of sorts. So I just use the naked body scanner to avoid the embarrassment.
I was wondering if they would still pat you down if you had a boner. And then pretend to enjoy it. Or what if you found out you didn't even have to pretend?
1. The act of displaying properties or characteristics of an asshat. This includes but is not limited to wearing your ass for a hat or saying/commiting an act that causes the audience in presence to become dumber.
2. The art of becoming or practicing flagrantly being an asshat.
Depending on the turpidity of the security-check Chubs, Federal protocol requires that record of said chubs be kept for a minimum of 2 years under the Patriot Act in an attempt to beat off terrorism.
Ok, I understand the visual which results in the term "asshat", but for the life of me I have never been able to figure out the background or the meaning of the term "assclown". Can someone please explain?
P.S. No lie, the word verfication is "luratio" -- is that some sexual act I am missing out on?
I think the posters's point was that there aren't many Afghan farmers or Yemani sheep herders jumping out of the sky with AKs and C4 strapped to their chests running for the nearest McDonalds or Starbucks to blow the fat American turds to....is there an opposite of Jannah(?)...hell.
besides, maybe some selective population control wouldn't be so bad. Might cut down the lines at Tao or Sapphire. Defiitely would shorten the line at my local Starbucks.
Time to put on the big boy pants, we live in a dangerous world. Always have, now it is zealots and idiots, it used to be germs and large animals. I'm happy to be living now, except when your fat ass gets between me and my coffee.
"besides, maybe some selective population control wouldn't be so bad. Might cut down the lines at Tao or Sapphire. Defiitely would shorten the line at my local Starbucks."
Careful, the saying "First kill all of the lawyers" has been around long before any of us.
Sounds like Nancy's life has taken a horribly wrong turn for the worse.
In the heyday of Nevada residential CD, Nancy ruined lots of lives while simutaneously making herself wealthy. She accused former employers of sexual harassment to gain advantage in post-employment financial maneuvers (ask Bob Maddox). There were ethical violations galore and even more financial improprieties. This was a woman driven by money and power who did not care whom she harmed. And while not as unpleasant as some others, she could be unnecessarily difficult in litigation.
With all of that said, if there is any truth to the facts of this new story, we should be sad that her life has become this awful. If this is true, the pain she is suffering must be truly profound. She has children who are likely also suffering. No one should take any joy in this. A fellow human is in agony.
I agree with 1:22 - it is sad and I don't take pleasure in her pain.
I will, however, suggest that the WWL block any commenter who brings up the phrase "First kill all of the lawyers" again. The last discussion between retarded Shakespearean scholars was horrible enough. It was in a play hundreds of years ago - who cares. I'll take doublekickstand, pow, Troy Fox TF'd H&S at the ATMS basement Christmas party over another discussion about whether our profession is noble or not (it isn't).
I also agree with 1:22. I had many ren-ins with Nancy Quon during the CD craze, and she did nmake them more unpleasant than they had to be. Nevertheless, I would never wish her any harm.
As professionals, our disputes are business, not personal. The great thing about this profession is that we can fight to the death in the courtroom, and have a nice lunch or golf game after.
Over at Above the Law they note five contestants on this season's "The Apprentice" are out of work attorneys. Law firms are shrinking. Law schools have become JD mills. The Economist (also noted by ATL)reports lawyers aren't making as much as they thought they would. Maybe Nancy Quon is a symbol of your profession, not a symptom. Be careful out there.
Former Employer sues Nancy and her then-employer (97A380929 Thomas Miller vs Nancy Quon, Robert Maddox, et al)
Thats OK--she sues that employer (98A387650 Nancy Quon vs Thomas Miller)
The formerly "then-employer" gets rewarded for his loyalty by Nancy suing him as she goes and joins Mainor [&] Harris (99A403739 Nancy Quon vs Robert Maddox, Robert C Maddox Professional Corp, et al)
But fear not--Nancy would sue the Mainor boys too (as they sued each other)! (03A473138 W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al vs Richard Harris, Richard A Harris PC) (03A475860 Richard Harris, Richard A Harris PC vs W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al) (04A478909 W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al vs Nancy Quon, Nancy E Quon PC, et al)
Ask yourself how many of your former employers you have been in litigation against?
This does not include the present allegations of acts so nefarious that all of those previous lawsuits would generate nary a blush compared to the present allegations against her and cohorts with whom she is alleged to be (figuratively) in bed.
I take it you've never done any construction defect work? From someone who unwillingly dabbled in it as a young associate at an insurance defense firm, Cynical Observer is almost 100% correct. There are very few actual construction "defects" that any normal homeowner would notice.
The one thing I will say is that the homeowner's attorney rarely goes so far as to say the homes are unlivable, but it happens. But all of the claims are overblown, most of the subs are bankrupt, and the insurance companies pay all the bills.
One does not have to be compassionate about her troubles to be better than her. One can be indifferent. She has sown these seeds and there are consequences to ones actions. If I say ONES one more time I am going to blow my head off.
For what it's worth, I knew Nancy Quon in better days. I took the bar exam with her in 1996 and I knew her in the early days of her construction defect practice. It may have been an act, but it did seem to me that she genuinely cared about her clients. Was she materialistic? Yes. Did she place her own interests above others'? Certainly. But the same things can probably be said about most of us.
I'm curious. What is so horrible about her past that "karma" would dictate she be murdered? Or are your lives so awful that it makes you people feel good to watch the deterioration of hers?
I don't think you're going to get an answer to your question, 9:37. It would require a person to fearlessly gaze into their soul and look at the unvarnished truth.
9:19 - don't need that, just need to drink four Four Lokos and you will spontaneously combust, but only if you drink it in the dark saying, "Quattro Loco!" in the mirror four times.
@9:37 Simply because one believes in karma does not mean that one enjoys watching this play out. If Quon's life has come to this, is truly unfortunate for her and those close to her. However, her tragedy does not lessen the impact of the pain that she may have caused people through her behavior.
You insurance defense lackeys are a bunch of jealous pieces of shit! All this karma talk. Who did she hurt? Not the homeowners, because the least they got were unknown problems repaired, and many got some real problems fixed. Not the sorry defense firms because without her, none of you assholes would have been able to sit in depos and eat, sleep and surf the net. So maybe the insurance companies paid some claims. Big deal. And please don't start that it hurts all of us with higher premium crap. The bottom line is Nancy did one helluva job for her clients. she worked the cases as well as any lawyer could. And she never sold her clients out. Now, all of you low paid associates crawl back into your holes and dream about what it would be like to be a real lawyer, like Nancy and the one or two partners who tried the defense side. The rest of you are petty, low life, dirtbag wannabes.
@8:06 You are wrong. Most of the now DOCUMENTED and SETTLED UPON problems are never fixed, yet the homeowner is required to disclose the case, the defects and the remedy for the defects. Alas, he cannot show his were fixed because most settlement monies went to the associations and the money was less than the cost to repair and so homowner is left with defects that he must now take a loss on when selling or fix, depsite them not being ACTUAL defects but some extrapolation that was used by the plaintiff to get the dollar amount up. Capiche? That is teh stuff that Quon can be proud of. May heaping shit burn upon her furrowed brow for EVAH! OH! Did I mention teh scores of subs that are now out of business because theyw ere sued beyond their capcity to defend and those lives were ruined too? As far as working for her clients, representation relies on it being a true and ethical claim. Her claims were so non-existant as to totally disregard Rule 11.
I love how absolute everyone is on here - that's what makes us lawyers, and likely insufferable human beings. No one on the defense side can say that the builders gave two shits about building a quality product. The houses were thrown together in a few weeks with little to no quality control. A single home owner has little recourse in that instance. The home owner likely would not even know what to look for in possible defects, allowing the statute to run on potential claims which may result in high replacement costs. The plaintiffs attorneys were providing a service and holding builders accountable for their shoddy workmanship.
On the other hand, the cases were (are) a cash cow for the plaintiffs attorneys. Surely, some of the claims were exaggerated (invented) and over blown to drive up settlement costs. CD cases are no different than any contingency/class action case. People slam them because the lawyers are the primary beneficiaries - but without them, plaintiffs would get nothing, and defendants' wrongful conduct would continue unchecked.
Not a perfect system, but neither side has a moral high ground. Defense attorney protect shitty builders, plaintiff attorneys are in it for themselves. Just do your job, take your paycheck, and quit calling the other side "bad".
You frankly could not be more wrong. The entire allegations in the Quon/Benzer litigation is that the alleged construction defects were never repaired but instead the money was funneled to consultant fees and other expenses. Therefore the assertion that homeowners got defects repaired is pure fallacy.
@7:44 but you still fail to see the damage AFTER the smoke settles. Not to mention, yes there are quality controls in the form of building inspectors. If they are failing at their job that is a different issue. I ahve purchased several homes in the valley over tthe last 13 eyars and not one of the builders has declined to address any issue brought up. Most of teh CD casesd involved condos who's associatations spent the money without the homeowner getting to see a dime of it. The fact remains, without people like QUON filing cases that were not worthy of filing, the homwowner would have at least not come out the other side having to disclose many defects which do not actually exist that were never fixed and now they take a hit on their value. That is what QUON got rich doing and her total waste of skin as a human is showing in spades now.
"yes there are quality controls in the form of building inspectors."
Ha! How's that working out for the Harmon?! Honestly, during the building boom - the building inspectors were overwhelmed to the point of complete irrelevance.
It's fine that you're a defense minded attorney, but now you're just being intellectually dishonest. And congrats on your due diligence and having the builders fix your problems, I'm guessing here that not all homeowners are as vigilent as you in checking for leaky windows, inadequate firewalls, nonconforming pipes, etc.
Happy belated Veterans Day everyone! 
FIRST. YELLO>
ReplyDeleteNancy Quon has resurfaced in a fantastically f'd up manner.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lvrj.com/news/arrest-made-in-suicide-scheme-involving-lawyer--ex-cop-107437368.html
Sorry - forgot to embed link properly:
ReplyDeletehref="http://www.lvrj.com/news/arrest-made-in-suicide-scheme-involving-lawyer--ex-cop-107437368.html"
Or not. I tried.
ReplyDeleteWord verification: html fail
Anyone else have a problem with the new TSA image scanners at the airports and the enhanced patdowns? When did we abdicate all of our civil liberties and search protections to the TSA? Don't whine that by buying the ticket we accept the "inconvinence" argument. The airlines are govt subsidized failed business models, and none of the airports are owned by the feds, yet security is run by them.
ReplyDeletei personally think maybe the www.optoutday.com idea has some merit, but as long as idiots believe terrorists are out to kill us all, then the courts will allow such invasions.
my Friday rant.
My main problem is I always get aroused when I get fondled. Like a fear boner of sorts. So I just use the naked body scanner to avoid the embarrassment.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering if they would still pat you down if you had a boner. And then pretend to enjoy it. Or what if you found out you didn't even have to pretend?
ReplyDelete"I'm sorry, but I never fly flaccid."
Wow. 9 AM and this thread is already going downhill. That's gotta be a new record.
ReplyDeleteNot for a Friday. It was going downhill when we were discussing Quon.
ReplyDeleteNancy Quon? Wow . . . . .
ReplyDeleteWord Verification: Roofie
i wonder if be being vajdazzled would be a serious issue in one of the scanners.
ReplyDeletelike looking a Hubble shots of constellations in space.
Thank you, veterans, for giving us the freedom to be complete douchebags/ass-clowns/ass-hats.
ReplyDeleteWord Verification: now back to our regular programming
Asshattery
ReplyDelete1. The act of displaying properties or characteristics of an asshat. This includes but is not limited to wearing your ass for a hat or saying/commiting an act that causes the audience in presence to become dumber.
2. The art of becoming or practicing flagrantly being an asshat.
Depending on the turpidity of the security-check Chubs, Federal protocol requires that record of said chubs be kept for a minimum of 2 years under the Patriot Act in an attempt to beat off terrorism.
ReplyDelete**turgidity**
ReplyDeleteReally?!?! "...but as long as idiots believe terrorists are out to kill us all..."
ReplyDeleteSo... if you believe that terrorist are out to kill us ("us" being American, I assume, but you could mean any people), then you are an idiot?!?
What terrorist have you interviewed that said he DIDN'T want to kill people!!
@12:10
ReplyDeleteDid you mean to say "not" out to kill us?
So... if you believe that terrorist are out to kill us ("us" being American, I assume, but you could mean any people), then you are an idiot?!?
Ok, I understand the visual which results in the term "asshat", but for the life of me I have never been able to figure out the background or the meaning of the term "assclown". Can someone please explain?
ReplyDeleteP.S. No lie, the word verfication is "luratio" -- is that some sexual act I am missing out on?
Luratio = the act of giving a skulljob to the butler from the Addams family.
ReplyDeleteI think the posters's point was that there aren't many Afghan farmers or Yemani sheep herders jumping out of the sky with AKs and C4 strapped to their chests running for the nearest McDonalds or Starbucks to blow the fat American turds to....is there an opposite of Jannah(?)...hell.
ReplyDeletebesides, maybe some selective population control wouldn't be so bad. Might cut down the lines at Tao or Sapphire. Defiitely would shorten the line at my local Starbucks.
Time to put on the big boy pants, we live in a dangerous world. Always have, now it is zealots and idiots, it used to be germs and large animals. I'm happy to be living now, except when your fat ass gets between me and my coffee.
"besides, maybe some selective population control wouldn't be so bad. Might cut down the lines at Tao or Sapphire. Defiitely would shorten the line at my local Starbucks."
ReplyDeleteCareful, the saying "First kill all of the lawyers" has been around long before any of us.
Sounds like Nancy's life has taken a horribly wrong turn for the worse.
ReplyDeleteIn the heyday of Nevada residential CD, Nancy ruined lots of lives while simutaneously making herself wealthy. She accused former employers of sexual harassment to gain advantage in post-employment financial maneuvers (ask Bob Maddox). There were ethical violations galore and even more financial improprieties. This was a woman driven by money and power who did not care whom she harmed. And while not as unpleasant as some others, she could be unnecessarily difficult in litigation.
With all of that said, if there is any truth to the facts of this new story, we should be sad that her life has become this awful. If this is true, the pain she is suffering must be truly profound. She has children who are likely also suffering. No one should take any joy in this. A fellow human is in agony.
I agree with 1:22 - it is sad and I don't take pleasure in her pain.
ReplyDeleteI will, however, suggest that the WWL block any commenter who brings up the phrase "First kill all of the lawyers" again. The last discussion between retarded Shakespearean scholars was horrible enough. It was in a play hundreds of years ago - who cares. I'll take doublekickstand, pow, Troy Fox TF'd H&S at the ATMS basement Christmas party over another discussion about whether our profession is noble or not (it isn't).
xoxo
Did Legally Unbound get outed or win an election for public office/judge? I really miss that sumbitch.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with 1:22. I had many ren-ins with Nancy Quon during the CD craze, and she did nmake them more unpleasant than they had to be. Nevertheless, I would never wish her any harm.
ReplyDeleteAs professionals, our disputes are business, not personal. The great thing about this profession is that we can fight to the death in the courtroom, and have a nice lunch or golf game after.
Over at Above the Law they note five contestants on this season's "The Apprentice" are out of work attorneys.
ReplyDeleteLaw firms are shrinking.
Law schools have become JD mills.
The Economist (also noted by ATL)reports lawyers aren't making as much as they thought they would.
Maybe Nancy Quon is a symbol of your profession, not a symptom.
Be careful out there.
I'm making way more than I thought I would. Sucks to be those guys.
ReplyDeletekarma
ReplyDeleteWhen someone ruins as many lives as Quon has, who cares when she ruins her own?
ReplyDeleteMayeb she should have gotten her husband to wack her over the head with a cast iron frying pan, nah, that has already been doen in Vegas...
Nancy: Finally, KARMA ha s caught up with you. I have been praying for years that it would!
ReplyDeleteLove, your old friend
Robert Maddox
I'm new(er) here. What happened with Robert Maddox and Quon?
ReplyDelete@ 6:22
ReplyDeleteFormer Employer sues Nancy and her then-employer
(97A380929 Thomas Miller vs Nancy Quon, Robert Maddox, et al)
Thats OK--she sues that employer
(98A387650 Nancy Quon vs Thomas Miller)
The formerly "then-employer" gets rewarded for his loyalty by Nancy suing him as she goes and joins Mainor [&] Harris
(99A403739 Nancy Quon vs Robert Maddox, Robert C Maddox Professional Corp, et al)
But fear not--Nancy would sue the Mainor boys too (as they sued each other)!
(03A473138 W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al vs Richard Harris, Richard A Harris PC)
(03A475860 Richard Harris, Richard A Harris PC vs W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al)
(04A478909 W Mainor, W Randall Mainor PC, et al vs Nancy Quon, Nancy E Quon PC, et al)
Ask yourself how many of your former employers you have been in litigation against?
This does not include the present allegations of acts so nefarious that all of those previous lawsuits would generate nary a blush compared to the present allegations against her and cohorts with whom she is alleged to be (figuratively) in bed.
Can anyone confirm layoffs at Peel Brimley?
ReplyDelete7:44 PM - you win this thread.
ReplyDelete7:44,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the answer.
6:22 PM
Does anyone know if the comment by "CynicalObserver" in this article is correct re: the Harmon?
ReplyDeleteYep, Nancy has done awful things to clients, other attorneys, former employers, former business partners, etc.
ReplyDeleteAnd if we take joy in her current troubles, we are no better than she.
@6:03,
ReplyDeleteI take it you've never done any construction defect work? From someone who unwillingly dabbled in it as a young associate at an insurance defense firm, Cynical Observer is almost 100% correct. There are very few actual construction "defects" that any normal homeowner would notice.
The one thing I will say is that the homeowner's attorney rarely goes so far as to say the homes are unlivable, but it happens. But all of the claims are overblown, most of the subs are bankrupt, and the insurance companies pay all the bills.
And the attorneys' fees checks for all the insurance defense firms don't bounce.
ReplyDeleteOne does not have to be compassionate about her troubles to be better than her. One can be indifferent. She has sown these seeds and there are consequences to ones actions. If I say ONES one more time I am going to blow my head off.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, I knew Nancy Quon in better days. I took the bar exam with her in 1996 and I knew her in the early days of her construction defect practice. It may have been an act, but it did seem to me that she genuinely cared about her clients. Was she materialistic? Yes. Did she place her own interests above others'? Certainly. But the same things can probably be said about most of us.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious. What is so horrible about her past that "karma" would dictate she be murdered? Or are your lives so awful that it makes you people feel good to watch the deterioration of hers?
I don't think you're going to get an answer to your question, 9:37.
ReplyDeleteIt would require a person to fearlessly gaze into their soul and look at the unvarnished truth.
9:19 - don't need that, just need to drink four Four Lokos and you will spontaneously combust, but only if you drink it in the dark saying, "Quattro Loco!" in the mirror four times.
ReplyDeletewhere can i get a four loco before its banned?
ReplyDelete@9:37
ReplyDeleteSimply because one believes in karma does not mean that one enjoys watching this play out. If Quon's life has come to this, is truly unfortunate for her and those close to her. However, her tragedy does not lessen the impact of the pain that she may have caused people through her behavior.
But I think we can all agree she has a fabulous rack.
ReplyDelete@2:44 I scored a few at my local 7-11. Good times.
ReplyDeleteWTF? They are trying to ban booze? Has history taught us nothing?
ReplyDeleteMy word verification was "dizzi" lol
You insurance defense lackeys are a bunch of jealous pieces of shit! All this karma talk. Who did she hurt?
ReplyDeleteNot the homeowners, because the least they got were unknown problems repaired, and many got some real problems fixed.
Not the sorry defense firms because without her, none of you assholes would have been able to sit in depos and eat, sleep and surf the net.
So maybe the insurance companies paid some claims. Big deal. And please don't start that it hurts all of us with higher premium crap.
The bottom line is Nancy did one helluva job for her clients. she worked the cases as well as any lawyer could. And she never sold her clients out.
Now, all of you low paid associates crawl back into your holes and dream about what it would be like to be a real lawyer, like Nancy and the one or two partners who tried the defense side. The rest of you are petty, low life, dirtbag wannabes.
@8:06
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong. Most of the now DOCUMENTED and SETTLED UPON problems are never fixed, yet the homeowner is required to disclose the case, the defects and the remedy for the defects. Alas, he cannot show his were fixed because most settlement monies went to the associations and the money was less than the cost to repair and so homowner is left with defects that he must now take a loss on when selling or fix, depsite them not being ACTUAL defects but some extrapolation that was used by the plaintiff to get the dollar amount up. Capiche? That is teh stuff that Quon can be proud of. May heaping shit burn upon her furrowed brow for EVAH! OH! Did I mention teh scores of subs that are now out of business because theyw ere sued beyond their capcity to defend and those lives were ruined too?
As far as working for her clients, representation relies on it being a true and ethical claim. Her claims were so non-existant as to totally disregard Rule 11.
I love how absolute everyone is on here - that's what makes us lawyers, and likely insufferable human beings. No one on the defense side can say that the builders gave two shits about building a quality product. The houses were thrown together in a few weeks with little to no quality control. A single home owner has little recourse in that instance. The home owner likely would not even know what to look for in possible defects, allowing the statute to run on potential claims which may result in high replacement costs. The plaintiffs attorneys were providing a service and holding builders accountable for their shoddy workmanship.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, the cases were (are) a cash cow for the plaintiffs attorneys. Surely, some of the claims were exaggerated (invented) and over blown to drive up settlement costs. CD cases are no different than any contingency/class action case. People slam them because the lawyers are the primary beneficiaries - but without them, plaintiffs would get nothing, and defendants' wrongful conduct would continue unchecked.
Not a perfect system, but neither side has a moral high ground. Defense attorney protect shitty builders, plaintiff attorneys are in it for themselves. Just do your job, take your paycheck, and quit calling the other side "bad".
Nice post - 7:44
ReplyDelete@8:06
ReplyDeleteYou frankly could not be more wrong. The entire allegations in the Quon/Benzer litigation is that the alleged construction defects were never repaired but instead the money was funneled to consultant fees and other expenses. Therefore the assertion that homeowners got defects repaired is pure fallacy.
@7:44 but you still fail to see the damage AFTER the smoke settles. Not to mention, yes there are quality controls in the form of building inspectors. If they are failing at their job that is a different issue. I ahve purchased several homes in the valley over tthe last 13 eyars and not one of the builders has declined to address any issue brought up. Most of teh CD casesd involved condos who's associatations spent the money without the homeowner getting to see a dime of it. The fact remains, without people like QUON filing cases that were not worthy of filing, the homwowner would have at least not come out the other side having to disclose many defects which do not actually exist that were never fixed and now they take a hit on their value. That is what QUON got rich doing and her total waste of skin as a human is showing in spades now.
ReplyDelete"yes there are quality controls in the form of building inspectors."
ReplyDeleteHa! How's that working out for the Harmon?! Honestly, during the building boom - the building inspectors were overwhelmed to the point of complete irrelevance.
It's fine that you're a defense minded attorney, but now you're just being intellectually dishonest. And congrats on your due diligence and having the builders fix your problems, I'm guessing here that not all homeowners are as vigilent as you in checking for leaky windows, inadequate firewalls, nonconforming pipes, etc.