Monday, December 27, 2010

The Latest Headlines

A couple of headlines that I don't see mentioned in the comments yet today...

Someone started a fire at Family Court. Perhaps Judge Moss was purging her naughty and nice list? You know, if she had one.


Sandoval has pets. Steve Wynn has Monegasque citizenship. These are both news, but neither the Sun nor the RJ has yet to cover Vega's antics. Oh, wait, it was in the RJ's forums. That counts, right?

269 comments:

1 – 200 of 269   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Newest Headline: Jolley Urga firm getting destroyed in malpractice action in Department 12.

Then again, what else is new.

Anonymous said...

I'm starting to really admire Howard Awand. Stand up guy. As badly as the US Attorney wants those lawyers and doctors, one has to imagine that Howard could have avoided time for ratting. The fact that he has not is admirable.

Anonymous said...

@9:12
In my opinion, it's only admirable if Awand is doing it to protect innocent people. If he's only doing it to protect a bunch of criminals, then I have no respect for him.

Anonymous said...

How admirable. A convicted felon dummies up to protect a bunch of thieves who made millions between them.

Anonymous said...

@9:12AM: Nice of you to admire Howard Awand, a man who conspired with doctors and lawyers to rip off injured people.
The public already has a low opinion of the legal profession. This medical mafia business only reinforces the disgust.
Just because Awand doesn't lay down for the feds doesn't make him a stand up guy.

Anonymous said...

The US Attorney could care less if Awand, or anyone else for that matter, is telling the truth. They just want convictions. Am I wrong? I don't do criminal law, but that is the distinct impression that I have. In any event, I have to hand it to the guy for not perjuring himself, at the government's request, just to cut himself a deal. That rat bastard, Myhre, even threw his wife in prison for 3 years just to get to Awand. Of course, Dawson, the government lackey went right along with the program. I, too, cannot help but admire a guy who refuses to lie for the government just to save himself. What evidence is there that any of this nefarious stuff alleged ever happened. Sounds like sour grapes from the insurance companies. If Myhre had something to support his theory, why has he not brought it in the last 5 1/2 years that this case has been investigated?

Anonymous said...

10:45, what is your evidence to support your claim that doctors and lawyers conspired to rip off anybody? The only evidence I have seen is the Kabins - Gage matter. What has that got to do with anybody else? Vannah and Eglet seem to be doing just fine without Howard Awand. So, other than drinking Myhre's water, what is the basis of your statement that they are a bunch of thieves, as you call them? Name one single victim.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:46 - well said. I admire Awand mostly because I admire those who do not snitch to benefit themselves. I don't care who they're protecting. One only needs to concern himself with his own actions, rather than rat out the actions of others

Anonymous said...

I strongly suspect the Las Vegas Review-Journal has not covered Judge Valeri Vega's antics with the jury is because her husband works at the RJ.

What a crappy news organization.

Anonymous said...

Vannah and Eglet were involved with Awand??????????

Anonymous said...

What's up with the Jolley Urga case? Does it actually have teeth or is it a stupid action that has absolutely zero chance of success?

Anonymous said...

@11:03:

RJ and Sun won't cover Vega because her husband writes a 2-bit column about gaming?? Vega's husband wields so much power over there that he can stop the presses? You obviously know nothing about the news business, or you are conspiracy-theory nutjob.

Anonymous said...

okay 11:16, now THAT was funny.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:46:

Yes, you are wrong. For not practicing criminal law, you sure have a strong opinion of Steve Myhre. He must have spanked your ass in court, or your a little too close to the case. Which is it?

Anonymous said...

10:53 AM - let's start with every client of Awand's who had health insurance but was encouraged by Awand or one of his lawyers to put his or her back surgery on a lien instead of submitting the bill to the health insurance company. Ignore, for the moment whether or not the client actually needed back surgery.

Anonymous said...

It only took me 3 months of working at an insurance defense firm to realize what was going on in Las Vegas between the Plaintiffs' firms in town and certain doctors. And it wasn't limited to Gage and Kabins. I saw quite a few car accident "victims" with the exact same "neck and/or back injuries" who received the exact same "treatment" from the exact same set of doctors/chiros.

Although I don't feel bad for these accident "victims" who choose to undergo back surgery just to increase their medical bills.

Waldo Lydecker said...

11:39, why don't you let go of Sherm's dick long enough to write why you think the RJ has not written about the Judge Vega story, a story getting national attention? I never mentioned the LV Sun dickhead.

And, you shit for brains, you might look into the Las Vegas Review-Journal being censured by the American Journalism Review for initially KILLING A STORY about one of its employees, Rafael Tamariello, who died of a drug overdose.

Papers killing stories? No. Never happen. For those of us in the journalism business it's called "spiking" a story.

I am done educating idiots like you. Respond if you must, but it won't make any sense, so I am out of here.

Thus endeth the lesson 11:39.

Anonymous said...

Dear Elle,
Whats up with these lame blogs? Posting links, or one lame sentence about the news, does not a blogger make.

Anonymous said...

Actually, when the blog first started, it provided links to all the news stories. I appreciate that since I don't always have time to look at the paper.

Anonymous said...

They're just going through the motions in Dept. 12. Judge Leavitt doesn't understand claim and/or issue preclusion. These same issues were already tried before Judge Hardcastle and the attorneys won. The plaintiffs appealed and lost. This is the Plaintiffs' third bite at the apple. Judge Leavitt doesn't get it, but the Supremes will. This one is destined to accomplish little other than to line the pockets of the attorneys who handle the appeal.

Anonymous said...

H&S was nice enough to mail me something about Sid kistler joining the firm. Filed under "who gives a fuck, but thanks for wasting your money on this mass mailng".

Anonymous said...

Waldo, pull your head up from lickin my taint long enough to smell something other than the klingons stuck to my sphincter, you sorry sack of shit. "National attention?" Some turd with a blog picks up a story about some twice convicted two bit whore who convinced Barry Scheck to look at her case, and you call that national attention? In addition to having your face filled with my jizz, you are delusional.

And you are not a journalist, loser. You don't educate anyone except for being an expert on how to guzzle cum. so go on back to the room in your moms basement, log out of the freaky porn site, and log back into your blog that nobody will read when you get it up and running.

Anonymous said...

Waldo;
Why didn't you mention the LV Sun, as the previous poster correctly noted that they have not picked up the story either? The fact that they didn't write anything about it seems to support the potty mouth poster's assertion that this really isn't much of a story. Or is there a conspiracy at the Sun to 'spike' the story as well? Seems a little far fetched. Also, your assertion that the RJ 'spiked' a story about an employee doesn't help your point either. It doesn't seem analagous as there wasn't an outside entity pressuring them not to write something about someone they liked.

Potty mouth brings up a good point. Anyone can get a website to blog about anything. Sensationalism attracts attention to blogs and even legitimate news websites because people want to hear about scandal, even when there isn't one. I put my trust in ethical lawyers, judges, prosecutors and juries, and it looks like they were all in agreement on this young lady's guilt. They aren't always right, but I tend to believe in a jury's verdict moreso than some 'journalist' trying to make a name for themselves by attacking a judge with a good ethics track record.

Anonymous said...

WOW, who are these disgusting creeps who resort to these kinds of comments to make their point, whatever the point is? BTW, I asked for the name of a single victim from Awand and the medical mafia. Apparently, these geniuses can't come up with any, because other than generalities they cannot come up with a single name of a single victim, not one! I guess that is why there have not been any indictments in 5 1/2 years.

Anonymous said...

@5:34: Melodie Simon

Anonymous said...

Are we talking here "LATEST HEADLINES?" ????

Well then give me some.

Like, why does

James E. Smith Nevada Bar #052

appear FIRST on the votes for ASSHAT of 2010?

Are there any leads out there?

Anonymous said...

How about what are the "LATEST HEADLINES" on past scandals?

What's happening on the Philip Singer charges?

Any leads out there?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, and how about the Delveccio Show?

Where and what are the major players doing with their professional lives now?

Any leads out there?

Let's spill it.

Anonymous said...

Is there going to be BREAKING NEWS ON NSB #052?

Who the hell is he anyway and why is he at the top of the ASSHAT list for 2010?

Anonymous said...

@ 5:05 am

ON NSB: #052 -->

There's been talk around town. Might have something to do with that paralegal operation he runs through

www.Conexa-LLC.com.
www.nevadaannulment.org
www.nevadadivorce.org
www.lasvegasnevadabankruptcy.com
www.livingwill-livingtrust.com
www.quick-nevada-divorce.com

He's got some other sites running out there on the internet for the porno industry, two of them I believe. I heard that his "head paralegal" runs the porn sites also.

Law + porno is a recipe for some strange bedfellows and even stranger outcomes, all becoming of a great script for Saturday Lifetime Movie ...

You mix the two industries and you are bound to eventually run into some trouble.

Looks like some trouble has caught up with him.

Anonymous said...

I'm not involved in the merits of the discussion of the lack of the media participation in the Vega mess, but did want to point out that when a poster reverts to the type of language used by what someone dubbed "potty mouth", the rest of us all assume that guy has performance issues. Just saying.
Except for double kickstands guy, of course.

Anonymous said...

@8:51 am - I couldn't agree more. I cuss more than most, but not when I am trying to prove a point. Resorting to that type of language just makes me picture some cynical old man preaching to anyone who will listen. However did he pass the bar when he can't formulate a rational argument to prove his side?

Anonymous said...

off subject but does anyone have any information on that class action lawsuit some firm is trying to bring against the Nevada State Bar on behalf of those that failed the bar?

Anonymous said...

Seems like the whole class action against the bar rumor goes around after each exam.

Anonymous said...

@10:52 - yeah but I've heard from a few law students who failed and have actually been contacted by the firm. Just pretty curious what the basis would be....personally I think it is a lawsuit full of cry babies

Anonymous said...

I heard it was bailey kennedy but I'm not sure about this

Anonymous said...

What are Failed Takers suing for? Violation of their constitutional rights? What a stupid case. They should be publicly ridiculed for not being able to pass an easy exam of their first or second try (shout out to the retakers who eventually passed).

Jordan Ross, Principal, Ross Legal Search said...

December 28, 2010 10:54 AM - This is a really disturbing comment coming from an educated person and perhaps even a member of the bar. To participate in and perpetuate the nonsense and destructiveness of the "don't snitch" sub-culture in a society trying to live under the social contract and the rule of law is the height of selfishness and irresponsibility. Calling police or prosecutor is not "snitching", it's being a responsible citizen reporting criminal behavior. This attitude has already done incalculable damage not just to everyday levels of crime and violence, but in breeding a contempt, not just of the law, which is certainly flawed, but of the very idea of civic duty and moral obligation to other people. I can't speak to what anger or bitterness has reduced you to a purely Darwinian view of life, but even a cynical person such as myself believes in making a difference.

Anonymous said...

You can take your "Civic Duty" and "see something say something" big brother horse manure elsewhere.

There's a difference between ratting out the pot-smoker next door and the corner drug dealer.

So when someone express and opinion as to Awand's character it ain't so black and white.

BTW the rule of law has its limits too.

"An unjust law is no law at all"-St. Augustine

Anonymous said...

Here is the Awand/Kabins indictment. http://www2.8newsnow.com/docs/GageAwand2SSInd.pdf
For those who insist there are no victims, please read the indictment.
For those who admire crooks who have the balls not to rat out their fellow crooks, I think you might want to review your opinion of personal integrity.
Also, perhaps you haven't read anything about Vega and the Fakoya trial since she has BEEN ON VACATION.
Im guessing if a story is coming the reporter might want to talk to the judge, you know, the person the story is about, before writing a piece.

Anonymous said...

Everyone is screaming about Vega keeping a jury late because she had vacations plans. Vega keeps juries late regardless of her personal plans. Example from a case I worked on: “At the hour of 6:01 PM, the Jury retired to deliberate … At the hour of 1:32 AM, the Jury returned with a verdict …”
Right out of the minutes, though it was a Friday.

Anonymous said...

Vega's short trial days to attend soccer games are more offensive than her vacation plans. We all need time off and it is difficult to reschedule a vacation last minute.

She would not have run the trial into her vacation time if she would have held trial for more than a few hours per day. It is her fault the trial went longer than expected.

Anonymous said...

"Vega's short trial days to attend soccer games are more offensive than her vacation plans"

Indeed. My point being this is not about her vacation. It's much deeper.

Anonymous said...

Awand is taking his medicine on the stuffe he was caught doing, he shouldn't have to rat out his former associates. If the Feds have a case against Vannah or Eglet or Prince or Schupp or Horton or Lemper or any of the other doctors or lawyers they want to nail, they should bring it. Under what tortured interpretation of criminal law is Awand required to help the government make its case?

This whole crap is being pushed by insurance companies who can't stand it that these doctors and lawyers have been kicking their asses for years. Maybe if they paid their defense lawyers a little better and opened their wallets at election time, they wouldn't be getting their asses kicked by Eglet!

Anonymous said...

@ Jordon - I think you are confusing two very distinct concepts. Firstly, someone who calls the cops on the pot smoking neighbor I have no issue with. However, the criminal defendant who taked a lesser sentence for ratting out a codefendant, I have a huge issue with. The first person is just a concerned citizen. The second is guilty of a crime and instead of accepting their punishment, they rat out another in hopes of a lesser sentence.

I personally think all deals to criminal defendants should be done away with. I don't trust what the snitching codefendant is saying and I would like to see him tried and face the same punishment as another charged with his crime.

Anonymous said...

Oh, goody. The CC Supremes have decided they get to promulgate even more rules, this time on how criminal evidence can be stored or accessed. And their authority to do so comes from where, exactly?

Anonymous said...

taked? Seriously? I normally hate spelling/grammar Nazis but are you effing kidding me?

Anonymous said...

took...sorry I was taking a 45second break from doing real work. oh and it's fucking, not effing. We're not in preschool

Anonymous said...

I prefer "f'ing."

Anonymous said...

i think it's pronounced - in olde english - TA-ked. As in, thou hast ta-ked me book.

Anonymous said...

FOR: 12/29 @ 4:47 PM AND 5:18 PM

Not in preschool ???? Surely thou does not speaketh with truth .... if the only points you can come back with in argument are spelling errors and trash mouth.

15 minutes facing the wall at recess.

The School Yard Monitor

news headlines said...

Breaking news comes as swiftly on the internet as on other sources. Online news provides much more interactive tools to its users.

Anonymous said...

Does Elle still work here?

Anonymous said...

"@ Jordon - I think you are confusing two very distinct concepts. Firstly, someone who calls the cops on the pot smoking neighbor I have no issue with...

December 29, 2010 3:05 PM"

Mormons ruin everything.

Anonymous said...

Snitches are bitches and bitches get stitches.

What kind of a pagan calls the cops on their pot smoking neighbors?! Leave your peace pipe loving neighbor to his/her earthly gift.

Anonymous said...

Michael Douglas is the new chief justice of the Nevada Supreme Court, taking over the leadership role at a critical time.

Anonymous said...

Douglas isn't bright enough to delve into even the simplest of legal issues with any real intellectual depth, as Pickering and Hardesty are able to do. He's not even on par with the mediocre Parraguire, who's personal charm deflects the lack of intellectual ability. But atleast he isn't as dumb as Saitta, who might as well be named Cherry's Appendage. Thankfully Douglas will have Pickering and Hardesty to carry the intellectual load for him

Jordan Ross, Principal, Ross Legal Search said...

December 29, 2010 3:05 PM makes a valid point which I think I can at least partially agree with. I would suggest, however, that the greater issue is the excessive number of laws. Without going into too much detail here, I strongly suggest everyone read this recent Economist Magazine article on the spiraling insanity of a criminal justice system out of control in this country, with too many incomprehensible laws and too many people locked up. Fewer laws and there's less room for plea bargains that cross the line - but we also stop trying to lock up everyone for everything. http://www.economist.com/16636027/print

Anonymous said...

Mormons don't ruin everything, they give comical relief to many!
Of course, if you hate them enough, you can always move to Iraq, I don't think they have any over there (yet).

Anonymous said...

I agree that Saitta's bench is a major embarrassment to this state.

One more reason we shouldn't elect judges. Appoint, then retention vote.

Anonymous said...

As a civil practitioner, it really isn't fair to ANY litigant that she (Saitta) be permitted to cast a vote, one way or another. I don't know what her knowledge of criminal law is/isn't, but with regard to civil issues, she is so ridiculously inept that one should have an automatic right to force her recusal. Her voting also violates the one-person, one-vote rule, since she merely votes however justice Cherry votes. It isn't fair that he should get two votes while other justices only get to cast one vote.

Anonymous said...

December 28, 2010 4:10 PM = Bill Kephart.

Anonymous said...

Waldo @12:32 Dec. 28: If you concentrated on the facts as much as you do profanity you would be a genius.
The Review-Journal was not "censured" by anyone. It's a newspaper. It was criticized when it failed for several days to report Raphael died of a drug overdose.
To put things in context, the RJ was hit by a double whammy: Rafe died one day and Don Evans, another RJ reporter, committed suicde the next.
The newsroom was devastated and mistakes were admittedly made.
But the RJ did not spike the tragedy as you put it, and it wasn't censured by the AJR.
Here's the link to this decade-old story:
http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=552

Anonymous said...

Fuck you half ass lawyers and the biggest fucking jew on the planet named ADAM STOKES!!!

Thanks for the fabulous Christmas Bonus you lousy cocksucker! Too bad we are referring cases to your most hated criminal defense attorney who also handles traffic tickets! You fucking shit for brains.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Anonymous said...

Aaahh . . . My first memories of Judge Saitta: I litigated in the Midwest for about five years before moving to Vegas.

My first court appearance in Vegas was in Saitta's District Court in 2004 in the old courthouse. The courtrooms were small and it was a busy calendar day - there were so many lawyers that we were standing in the hallway because not everyone could fit into the room, let alone sit.

Hearings began at 9:00. The bailiff said she was running late and would be here soon. Saitta didn't show up until after 9:40 -- sunglasses on her bleached-blond head and carrying a nice big cup of Starbucks.

Not even an apology for being late. Apparently her Starbucks was much too important. I was looking around at all the lawyers in the room and wondered how may clients would be paying an extra .7 just because the judge wanted her coffee.

Anonymous said...

The good news is that most of the patients that Awand got involved with weren't really injured to start with - or is that bad news?

A lot of them were injured after Awawnd and Co. "helped" them, though.

Anonymous said...

Jordan Ross = pompous windbag

Jordan Ross, Principal, Ross Legal Search said...

December 30, 2010 6:36 PM - "Jordan Ross = pompous windbag"

I'll take that, it's a bit hard for me to refute anyway. By the way did you actually have any comments on any of the legal, political or economic issues of the topic?

Anonymous said...

Dec 30 4:54 you sound like an RJ employee. Maybe Vin?

If so, you have provided a link to another site, which seems to be the same conduct for which Righthaven sues others who link to the RJ?

Anonymous said...

http://www.lvrj.com/news/judge-stands-by-decision-to-keep-jurors-overnight-112707464.html

Vega

Anonymous said...

http://www.lvrj.com/news/county-seeks-bar-investigation-of-defense-lawyer-112707379.html

MacArthur

Anonymous said...

@11:09,

Since you're commenting on WWL, I assume you have had some kind of legal training. Granted, that might be the kind of legal training offered by McGeorge, but it should be sufficient to allow you to read and understand, right?

Then understand this:

Righthaven didn't sue anyone for providing links, dumbass. Righthaven sued people for copying either the whole article or most of an article. Moral of the story? Don't steal articles, whether or not you mention where they came from. Links have ALWAYS been acceptable. They're like citations; they always direct the reader back to the original source.

Anonymous said...

Why insult McGeorge? Where did you go to school? Yale?

Anonymous said...

@ 8:28 AM

It's not where you went to school that matters. To reduce an issue to this point is nothing but smoke and mirrors that deflect from the real issues at hand in discussion.

WHAT REALLY MATTERS is

WHAT YOU DO WITH the education you have received.

Have you, as an attorney, made the world a better place to be in through your actions performed on behalf of your profession?

Anonymous said...

"It's not where you went to school that matters. To reduce an issue to this point is nothing but smoke and mirrors that deflect from the real issues at hand in discussion."

Perhaps you meant to direct this comment to 7:02. I think 8:28 was making a similar point.

Anonymous said...

7:02 here,

Why, is McGeorge off-limits? A large percentage of attorneys in this state went to McGeorge, and thus McGeorge has had a significant contribution to our sub-standard bar.

Anonymous said...

TO: 12/29 @ 5am/5:05am/6:41 am

RE: SBN: #052 and Conexa-llc.com

There ought to be "HEADLINES" on this operation. I took a closer look at the information provided.

When you go to the Conexa-llc.com site, once you "select" the service you are looking for (divorce/annulment/living will/bankruptcy), you are then REDIRECTED to different corresponding web sites, each of which has one common denominator, and that relates to the person who is running the Conexa show!

That's a ONE BIG OMG! Especially when you look at the historical archives for NevadaAnnulment.org and NevadaDivorce.org. Take a look and see -->

http://www.who.is/domain_archive-org/nevadaannulment.org

http://www.who.is/domain_archive-org/nevadadivorce.org

Then take a look at

Russell Thorn and Sabrina Thorn versus Maryse Wagner, Philip Singer and Legal Services Providers (2005-06)

AND

Maryse Wagner versus Philip Singer.

Here is another WHOPPER OF AN OMG I came across in researching this information! --> How did Maryse Wagner get her name change case SEALED with her history?

Maryse Wagner=Silvianne Steinbach.

There's even more --> 2 years later she comes back trying to change her name for a SECOND TIME. See the Family Court Record (if it has not "disappeared") yet.

Surely, someone at the State Bar MUST be aware of this FRAUD.

Anonymous said...

ON BREAKING NEWS ....

Yeah, didn't you know? They discovered a new species of Black Widow Spider (Latrodectus Hesperus)in Clark County.

The new name of the species used is dependent upon which phase the spider is in developmentally, so consequently there are two names:

In English it's called the BLACK WIDOW ATTORNEY SPIDER because she kills attorney's careers.

Latrodectus Hesperus Attornatus/-Maryse Wagner
Latrodectus Hesperus Attornatus/-Silvianne Steinbach

Anonymous said...

Yeah, and if you knew all of Latrodectus Hesperus Attornatus-Maryse Wagner history, you almost begin to feel bad for Phil Singer and the way things turned out for him.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:51 Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, the comment belongs to 7:02, I picked up the wrong time in reading upwards from the comments.

Thanks again for your sharp eyes!

Anonymous said...

I don't see Elle's name listed as one of the contributors anymore, so I guess she is gone. Miss you, Elle!

Anonymous said...

All right already, I'll come clean.

I've been a squatter in BEANTOWN'S space, since it has remained unoccupied for over a year. I can stake some claim to it, being located appropriately and at this very moment, I am 55 minutes into the New Year, and you there, are still in yesterday, steadily coming up from behind in time.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYONE OUT THERE!

This is BEANTOWN signing off, GIVING A BIG SHOUT OUT ACROSS THE MILES TO ELLE AND JOSEPH W. LAW.

Thanks for letting me squat on BEANTOWN'S space and take this ride. It's been really, really, real.

My very Best Wishes to everyone in 2011.

With Peace,
Beantown
(Squatter)

Anonymous said...

Regarding the "victims" of the Medical Mafia story:

@December 29, 2010 1:15 PM

An indictment is not conclusive-just because somebody has been indicted does not mean the allegations against them are true. But nice try.

@1:26

Melodie Simon actually stated that she does NOT feel she was a victim. In fact, she stated that she was happy with the representation she received from Gage.

I'm no fan of Awand, but I at least try to be objective about the issue. If it was really that obvious that there was wrong doing, then the feds would have brought charges against the doctors and lawyers they allege did so much wrong. The fact is, it has been over six years and nothing. Time to stop wasting the tax payers dime to put people away for petty tax charges.

Anonymous said...

Hey, change of topic:

I hear Kravitz, Schnitzer, Sloane lost ANOTHER associate....that's 4 in less than a year--ALL WOMEN!!!! Those dudes should take a good hard look at the way they treat their attorneys.

Anonymous said...

@3:13,

I'm a guy who doesn't mind working at a sausagefest, as long as I can hit the tittie bar on the way home. Think I should send my resume over?

Anonymous said...

Didn't Kravitz also lose the only female partner not too long ago?

Anonymous said...

Marty kravitz is so cool and enjoyable to be around. Why would anyone ever leave the firm.

Verification = Asshat

Anonymous said...

Marty isn't a bad guy - and he is a great lawyer.

Anonymous said...

@9:46:

Yes, Jane Eberhardy, the only female parner, left. Marty got so pissed off by the severance package she asked for that he yelled, "get the fuck out of my office you fucking cunt" and proceeded to throw eveything on her desk n the floor. This was during office hours with her door open for eveyone to hear. Yeah, he's a super nice guy, haha!

Word verfcation: mature

Anonymous said...

I applaud Kravitz's hard line with the bitches. It's good to know at least one man stands proud in our overly effeminate bar.

Anonymous said...

My guess: 3:13 is a former disgruntled employee and probably one of the females that left. Just saying.

Anonymous said...

I don't think there's anything "hard" about Marty Kravitz....sorry, I couldn't help it, you opened the door to that one. ;-)

Anonymous said...

Whether it was a disgruntled employee or not, it is what it is--4 associates and 1 partner (all women) left in a year. That says something regardless of who posted it. That's a pretty high turnover rate. If I were the managing partner, I would question what kind of work environment I had created and how I was treating my employees and co-workers.

Also, I know a few people who still work there--support staff mostly. From what I hear, a lot of people who work there are disgruntled. This firm has a lot of interoffice drama and I guess it makes for a pretty unpleasant work place.

Anonymous said...

Say what you will about his personality, which I hear can sometimes suck, but he is a very good attorney in the insurance defense area.

Anonymous said...

True. From what I hear, that place has more than its fair share of drama.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Kravitz Schnitzer are worst lawyers in this community, but it's the last place I'd want to work. EVEN after ATMS and H&S.

Anonymous said...

Kravitz is only a good lawyer in his own mind. He's not afraid to tell you how great he is and about all the money he makes but I've always found his legal work underwhelming. Definitely not someone who scares me when he's on the other side of the aisle.

I also know a little bit about what happened with some of the former female associates and the way he treated them and others (such as trying to hook up with his office manager who's husband had recently committed suicide) is disgusting and a reflection of the man's character.

Anonymous said...

I would take a "hard line with the bitches" as well if I were shorter than all of them like kravitz is. Lol...little Napoleon...sooooo pathetic....

Anonymous said...

God, that man will talk your face off about himself, how great he is, the cases he's won, how much money he has, how great his firm is and, most laughably, how so many associates have left and then wanted to come back so bad. He's so utterly self absorbed that he bragged about a super expensive cruise he took with his wife (and he actually threw out a dollar amount) yet he wasn't able to give Christmas bonuses to anyone. Sooooo tacky.

Anonymous said...

Marty is keepin' his pimp hand strong.

Anonymous said...

snow in vegas? can we shut down all the courthouses/law firms? please??

Anonymous said...

Marty stands tall in the community.

Anonymous said...

OMG, Marty IS kinda like a pimp--he's manipulative, he uses people, he's greedy, and the insecure little boy inside who never got to play with the cool kids needs constant ego stroking. That is an astute observation 9:09. Well done.

Anonymous said...

Ok, why has no one mentioned the spate of Glen Lerner commercials over the weekend, bearing the estimable visage of former JP Abbatangelo?

Two observations:

- He's actually SHORTER than Lerner, which surprised me.

- He isn't allowed to say a word.

lmao

Anonymous said...

Yeah, saw that. It looks like Lerner's standing next to his kid!

Anonymous said...

Lerner is standing on a telephone book in the commercial.

Anonymous said...

Didn't Marty lose his and have a nervous breakdown when the office manager refused his advances?

Anonymous said...

Losing 4 female attorneys, 1 female partner, sexually harassing an office manager after her husband passed away, calling a female and co-worker a “cunt,” boasting about how great he is to his staff and how much money he has but refusing to give staff bonuses for Christmas - Marty Kravitz is the Asshat of the Year - hands down.

Anonymous said...

@10:18 ... Marty doesn't stand "tall" anywhere.

Anonymous said...

I bet he has a pet liger at home.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone heard about Dr. Lemper and the fine he paid to the federal government for overbilling?

Anonymous said...

When Lerner takes his 400 mg of Viagra, he stands taller than Kravitz!

Anonymous said...

Abbatangelo is a stud. Great guy who screwed up and lost his seat.

I hope he makes a frickin KILLING with Lerner.

Anonymous said...

ok, enough about Kravitz, let's talk about his associate, Mike Lee...UUUUUGGGGHHHH....omg, could he be any more of a sexist pig? I love how he sexually harassed TWO female secretaries, the harassment was reported to the office manager and the managing partner, and there was NO punishment. Fucking disgusting.....

Anonymous said...

10:08, you do realize that by mentioning his name, you are making Mr. Lee cream in his pants? Kravitz too. I'm sure they are loving all this attention and will no doubt spin it in a way to stroke their egos. STOP!!!

Anonymous said...

Vomit.

Anonymous said...

@ 01/03 @ 9:53 am

"Snow in Vegas"...please do tell.

What's it feel like when "Hell freezes over?"

Ever thought you would see the day, eh?

Anonymous said...

All you people blogging on the Kravitz Team... Are you blogging impaired?

Your in the wrong lane ------>

Belongs in the "ASSHAT OF 2010" thread
----> Put blinker on
----> Make a hard left
----> Make comment
----> Don't get stopped by the School Yard Monitor.

This thread is on "LATEST HEADLINES", got any???

I'm partial to the one on the discovery of a new species of Black Widow Spider in Clark County:

Latrodectus Hesperus Attornatus/-Maryse Wagner
Latrodectus Hesperus Attornatus/-Silvianne Steinbach

Anonymous said...

@6:29,

Are you new to teh interwebz?

Any thread lasting longer than 100 comments is exempt from the no thread-jacking rule, as enforcement at that point becomes futile.

Anonymous said...

E. Brent Bryson got O.J.'s buddy out of jail today.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jan/04/oj-simpson-co-defendant/

Anonymous said...

It's not "all these people" posting about Kravitz - it's one disgruntled former employee.

Anonymous said...

9:24 - 6:29 is just looking for an excuse to bring up this steinbach person again for the 800th time.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:03, exactly what I was thinking.

Anonymous said...

Kravitz' office manager wouldn't bang him because she's banging another partner.

That partner was found to have sexually harassed one female associate who left, and the firm was forced to pay-out a very large settlement to her.

True.

Word verification - waysunaj

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I haven't heard the best things about ol' Kravitz Schnitzer. I think it's more than one disgruntled former employee here.

Anonymous said...

I see that the Simpson co-defendant plead and got house arrest. I wonder if he could have had that deal originally.

Anonymous said...

Whoever the Kravitz hater is definitely grinding (her?) axe on this thread. Malicious, vengeful, and spiteful would be too kind of words to describe the constant diatribe.

Are you the same person as the Half Price Lawyers Associate who keeps bashing Stokes about Christmas bonuses?

Anonymous said...

Four plead not guilty to murder for hire:

Rodriguez' attorneys are Ivette Maningo and Clark Patrick. Michelle Paet's attorney is Kristina Wildeveld. Austin's attorney is Susan Burke. Hawkin's attorney is Daniel Bunin.

Anonymous said...

Are those court appointed attorneys?

Anonymous said...

New Headline: BAR/BRI crushed in class action by this anonymous poster.

After years of litigation, this poster has successfully crushed BAR/BRI to the tune of $81.02.

Actually, it went like this: I took a bar exam in 2000 and used BAR/BRI -- passed successfully on first try. I took another state's bar exam in 2004 and used BAR/BRI -- passed successfully on the first try.

After 2004, I was notified that I was a potential class member in a lawsuit (by another lawyer while shooting the shit). I went to the website and confirmed I was such a potential class member, so I filled out some forms on at least two occasions. Today, I got a check for $81.02.

Damn you BAR/BRI for injuring me in some fashion I don't quite understand. Thank god for American Jurisprudence for rectifying this situation in which I was obviously harmed . . .

Is this what Lerner means when he says "one call, that's all"? I never spoke with an attorney and have no idea who my attorney was. But, he was damn good. . .

Anonymous said...

@ 3:33

Hilarious! Now I'm kicking myself for not registering for the class and collecting my $82.00. Good thing the class cost $2,000!

Anonymous said...

Whoa, Nelly, I think Kravitz and Stokes have lots of enemies. It's not just one poster. It's a posse.

Anonymous said...

CES sucks. The out of towners are hogging all the hookers and dancers. Assholes.

Lee Hatcher, Esq. said...

Elle Woods is no longer a contributor to WWL.

Sad.

Word verification: COMEBACK

Anonymous said...

It looks like this may be the last thread this blog ever has. So while there is still an audience, I would like to ask a couple of questions.

How does hiring look now compared to six months ago? A year ago? Two years ago? What trends do you see in hiring?

Anonymous said...

This blog has gone dark. Let's start up a new one. Any takers? Jordan Ross, Principal (lmao) has to boast somewhere.

Anonymous said...

FOR: "9:24 - 6:29 is just looking for an excuse to bring up this steinbach person again for the
800th time."
January 4, 2011 1:04 PM

FINDINGS OF FACT RE: "this steinbach person"

That's got to be the Twisted Sister herself posting. So very like her to distort reality, legally and otherwise. The name "Steinbach" is mentioned exactly 4 (FOUR) times in this thread. We can now bump that to 5 (FIVE) times with this comment. Stating the "800th" time surely is beyond
S T R E T C H I N G
T H E
T R U T H.

But, then again, that has been her historical expertise, to OBFUSCATE what is TRUE.

Now Twisted Sister Sil --> Ya gotta count this as one of those "goodliferides" you so highly recommend.

Anonymous said...

@ 8:23 - I have not previously posted on this thread, but I just couldn't help but make the observation that when I read what you write, I picture an undereducated conspiracy theorist that hates our government blah blah blah. when the previous poster said 800 times, he/she was being obviously sarcastic....however, just to add fuel to the fire...steinbach, steinbach, steinbach, etc times by 100. Now his name has been mentioned 800 times

Anonymous said...

Kravitz may have its share of enemies but the posts here are obvioiusly from someone who works/ed there and I think its the same person. If she has a legitimate sexual harassment claim she should file an EEOC complaint. Repetitive anonymous posts don't hold a lot of credibility and if the poster IS pursuing action against them, she should remember that computer records (including hard drive, metadata, etc.) which could reveal anonymous internet posts are discoverable in litigation.

Anonymous said...

And what is up with the erratic capitalization and arrows?

Anonymous said...

My thoughts exactly, 12:29.

Anonymous said...

As someone who has known Kravitz for a while, the posts are viciously accurate.
He is a midget who wears elevator shoes, hence the Napoleonic complex.
He is totally insecure, hence the dyed black hair.
He is a closet fag, hence the overcompensation by hitting on women and calling them “cunts”.
He is his biggest fan and never misses an opportunity to discuss his legal prowess to others, including sitting judges as he explains to them how smart he is and how ignorant they are.
If he were truly as brilliant, sexy, successful, and handsome as he will quickly tell you, why is he so universally viewed with such disdain and disgust?
Answer, simple, because all of you are jealous that you are not a no-dick little troll.

Anonymous said...

Just got an email from a friend.

Elle has a new blog. http://lasvegaslegallife.com

Guess she had other plans when she left this blog.

Anonymous said...

This is sad. I've been reading from the first few months this blog began. Now we've been abandoned by Legal Eagle, Joseph Law, Rapaport or whatever the teacher's name is, and now Elle. I'll probably check her new blog, but Wild Wild Law is the perfect name for a blog covering this f'd up bar. It has gotten me through some slow, crappy days. I will miss it.

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah, I also miss Legally Unbound.

bye,

8:28 PM

Anonymous said...

**continued**

To the people who keep talking about the "disgruntled current or former employee"--no shit, sherlock. Disgruntled: unhappy, dissatisfied, frustrated. I don't know many people who are happy or satisfied with their job who talk shit about their work place. Obviously the people (and clearly, it's not just one--dream on) who are posting these negative comments were/are not happy with working at this firm or they have a friend who is/was not happy working at this firm. But hey guess what, in case you hadn't noticed, THIS BLOG IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN OPEN, HONEST AND FRANK DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LEGAL COMMUNITY, FIRMS, LAWYERS, ETC. Often times, that is going to involve negative comments. Deal with it and stop your whining. You don't want to read negative posts? Then go to a different website. You don't want to be talk about like this? Then change the way you behave.

What I find most interesting about this thread is that while some people are bashing those who are leaving negative comments, no one is refuting the facts asserted.

Anonymous said...

On the Kravitz matter:

To the person who thinks it's all spiteful and malicious--from what I've heard, everything that's been said about the man IS TRUE!!!! He treats people like shit, he's a liar and a manipulator and he's obsessed with himself. He doesn't get to cry victim simply because people are now talking about it. He made his shitty bed, he can roll around in it.

Anonymous said...

To the people who think that anonymous posts on a public blog are "discoverable in litigation"--good luck with that. These types of blogs aren't in the habit of giving out person info--it ruins the whole point of having a public blog like this. Sure, you could get a court order but that would first entail showing damages, which you would be hard pressed to do. Second, even if you could show damages, everything that's been said here is either true, satire, or opinion!!! Speech like this is highly protected by the First Amendment. Why? Because, despite what one commenter said about credibility, having a place where people can freely and openly speak out about things without fear of retribution is considered one of the most important rights Americans have. Being about to say how you truly feel about something is where you find the credibility.

I also fail to see how a person who is litigating a sexual harassment case is damaged at all by posting a comment on a blog about how she was sexually harassed by the person she is suing. Even if it was discovered, so what?

Anonymous said...

And yes, the last several posts were all one person--OOOOO, YOU GOT ME!!!!

Elle Woods, Esq. said...

Thanks to the person who linked my new blog. Thanks to those who come to visit.

Anonymous said...

@ 9:36

What's sick is that there was barely any commentary for lawyer of the year, but you provide an opportunity to slam law offices/lawyers and it becomes open season. As it pertains to Kravitz, it's clear that there is a former disgrunted employee, and potentially current disgrunted employees, making the posts. Either way, these type of people are horrible for any work environment. If they had guts, then then they should step out in the open.

But bashing someone behind the shield of anonymity is cowardice, especially when you weigh the slanderous nature of the comments hurled at Kravitz. If it is a current employee, I'm sure s/he is a cancer who needs to be removed from the firm immediately. The type of vile hatred is indicative of an insufferable malcontent who infects other coworkers with negativity.

Perhaps you should offer this person a job, since you applaud this type of behavior. Either way, the unending attack is detestable and a signal that our profession and community is indeed heading to the gutter. Thanks for jumping in the driver's seat heading into the gutter.

Anonymous said...

@9:56

Well, maybe you should show everyone what "guts" you have and let us know who YOU are. Don't you think that commenting ANONYMOUSLY that people who comment ANONYMOUSLY are cowards is a little, oh, hypocritical?

"If it is a current employee, I'm sure s/he is a cancer who needs to be removed from the firm immediately. The type of vile hatred is indicative of an insufferable malcontent who infects other coworkers with negativity." HAHAHAHAHAHA--I think it's pretty clear who the cancer is that is creating a shitty work environment.

Yes, I applaud honesty--I'm such a terrible person.

AND PS: commentary is not slander when IT IS TRUE!!!!! Are you a first year law student?

Anonymous said...

@ 10:05

You're a troll who probably failed the bar three times. Have fun staying on WWL with the other trolls. Thanks to Elle for making a move to a troll-free Legal Blog. Here's looking forward to www.lasvegaslegallife.com and being rid of people like you.

Word Verification: Prego

Anonymous said...

Wow, I hope you are not an attorney because you suck at debating. So sorry I was trying to discuss the merits of blogs like this, first amendments rights, people's inability to deal with honesty, etc. I'm not the one leaving the diatribe of nasty comments--I was actually trying to shed some logic on the situation but apparently that's too much for you to handle. So you respond with hypocrisy, name calling and then you exit the building.

And if your inability to understand the basic elements of slander or the discovery process indicates anything, it's the fact that YOU failed the bar exam three times.

prego? wtf?

Anonymous said...

I've unfortunately known Mike Lee (from Kravitz) for years and he's still the biggest cocksucker I've met in Las Vegas.

Anonymous said...

Mike might be a cocksucker, but at least he's a dick to your face. I respect that about him.

Anonymous said...

No, he tries to be a dick to your face when in reality, he's just annoying, immature and not nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

Anonymous said...

I've been friends with Mike for years. He's a great guy, a great friend, and a good lawyer. It's a shame to see him slammed on here.

Anonymous said...

People throw around the term "great lawyer," but why. There are only a few in town. Don Cambell, Pat Hicks, hemanaski (sp) at Lionel, bob Eglet, vannah, and Adam kutner. Maybe 10 at tops.

Anonymous said...

I love how he's a "great" guy and friend but only a "good" lawyer.

Anonymous said...

@8:51

I hope you were being sarcastic about including Adam Kutner on your list of "great" lawyers in town. He may be successful, but I would not include him in the "great" category.

Anonymous said...

The reference to anonmymous comments being discoverable - I meant from your own computer, not information coming from the blog. As to free speech - you must not know much about the law or you would know that free speech rights have to do with the government infringing on speech. Nothing prevents a party from obtaining that speech during discovery in litigation. Who said anything about libel or slander claims? Again, you must not know much about legal practice or you would know that these comments would be discoverable if you have a harassment or discrimination suit Your stream of obsessive diatribes would certainly undermine the credibility of any legitimate claims you might have against them. I have no opinion either way about Kravitz or anyone at the firm, but your posts make it appear that the problem is with you, not them. And I never complained about the fact that the posts are negative. I quite enjoy negative posts; however, yours get tiresome when because of the repetitive, obsessive nature.

Anonymous said...

And go ahead and attach my typos in the last post since you have nothing of substance to say.

Anonymous said...

@9:31-- you referred to the remarks posted on this blog as slanderous, right? And why are you obsessed with directing your comments to ONE person. Delusional!!! And you clearly do have a personal stake in this.

Anonymous said...

To 9:31--

Your statement about the first amendment is a little bit over simplified. You are correct, 1st amendment doesn't protect speech from being discovered but it can play a role in private civil litigation. Application by state courts of a rule of law, whether statutory or not, to award judgment in a civil action is STATE ACTION.

In the end I don't see why it even matters. If the person/people work at the firm, his/her computer belongs to the firm and it can be searched with reckless abandon. Right?

Also, how does one get an anonymous post on a public blog from the poster's hard drive? I'm not a computer person--I'm asking bc I genuinely want to know.

Anonymous said...

What about Richard Wright? (spelling) Hes great.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:30

You would have to have access to the Blog's interface. A blog of this scale (small) would have records of every IP on every post. Most blogs purge this data after some time or prune the content due to the overwhelming amount of activity/usage by patrons. On this blog; however, activity is slim and none, thus the data you seek is out there. You just need to be an admin.

Anonymous said...

I did not refer to "slander" - that must have been someone else. Say whatever you want about them - my point is, when presented this way, it's not persuasive. I have come to expect lots of attorneys to be arrogant jerks - it seems to come with the territory. Contrary to your assertion, I don't have any stake in this whatsoever. In fact, I have no idea why I allowed myself to be sucked in, so now I'm going to stop.

10:30 - I'm not presuming posts were made from a work computer. The answer to your question: forensic computer analysis. I don't know how its done but I've seen and used the fruits of it.

Anonymous said...

10:48 - forensic computer analysts can often retrieve such information from the computer of the poster - I'm not talking about getting it from the blog. Screen shots of internet usage get stored in memory. Keep that in mind when using your gmail or whatever on your work computer.

Anonymous said...

Dear Kravitz rambler/disgruntled employee,

I have no dog in this fight. I do not know Kravitz and I practice in an entirely different area than that firm. However, I second the other posters concerns about your rambling. You have done more than just post what you dislike about him, you have done it numerous, repetitive times. Now you just seem like the type of employee that is never happy and complains about everything.

Further, I do not think you are a lawyer. Your postings seem to be coming from someone in the legal field, but not quite a lawyer. I have this urge to say you were his paralegal. Please learn how to make educated complaints/post concerns on this blog rather than just ramble. People that you truly want to convince, people like me who know nothing of kravitz, are now fairing on his side in this argument.

Final point: You have made your point about Kravitz, you have plead your case, now please go troll elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

Las Vegas makes national news for being stupid... again.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/hospitalized_in_coma_girl_13_is_ticketed_for_jaywalking

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/comatose-little-girl-gets-ticket-for-jaywalking/

Anonymous said...

That's awful about that girl. What jerks.

Here is more news on Vega's irresponsible antics in court:

http://www.lasvegascitylife.com/articles/2011/01/06/opinion/knappster/iq_41226817.txt

And the truth FINALLY comes out.

Anonymous said...

@3:24,

Who is the jerk? If I struck someone in my car who wasn't supposed to be in the road, I'd kind of want the investigating officer to make a determination of fault, if for no reason than to have something to refresh his recollection if and when the pedestrian's parents sue me.

And the cop can't mail the ticket, because tickets are complaints that need to be served.

So am I the jerk for wanting a record of fault when the plaintiffs and my insurance company are sure as hell going to focus on the fact that I don't have one?

Now, if the driver sues the girl and her parents for the damage to his car or for personal injuries... well, that might be a little jerkish.

Anonymous said...

@ 3:24 - what do you mean finally? Everything I read in that story had already been posted elsewhere, albeit, not the RJ

Anonymous said...

@ 3:49 - I am not an expert in this field BUT I'm pretty sure that tickets can be mailed in NV. Tickets from helicopters and/or traffic cameras are often mailed

Anonymous said...

@ 3:49 - also please do not just simply make the same arguments the commentors on ATL made. you practice here in NV, make some NV specific arguments

Anonymous said...

@4:06,

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that concepts like "fault," "service of process" and "plaintiff's avarice" didn't apply here in Las Vegas. Silly me.

Just for the record, what NV-specific arguments are there to be made? A reference to NRS 484B.287? Should I just be grateful the cops didn't shoot the girl involved?

Anonymous said...

@ 4:21 - EXACTLY - if it was henderson, the girl would have been shot. Metro, she at least had a 50/50 chance

Anonymous said...

He should have run over her again. I hate these jaywalking punks with no respect for law and order or their own safety.

Anonymous said...

3:49 pm speaks truth. It isn't as if the police officer came to the hospital to give the little girl the third degree. When participants in traffic accidents - not only pedestrians -are taken to the hospital, and responding police at the scene decide one of the hospitalized persons would have been cited if still at the scene, it is usual practice for the officer to go to the hospital to issue the ticket. Presuming we accept as given that people involved in traffic accidents can be cited by police and have to deal with traffic court, there isn't anything unusual, sinister, or heartless about police giving the ticket at the hospital.
We may feel sorry for the girl. We may not hold her to the same standard of care as we would an adult. It may even turn out that the driver was somehow at fault. Unhappily that also means she/her parents/their lawyer may at some point decide that where there was serious injury there must be fault on the part of the driver, and the officer's investigation as to who did what to whom may indeed help resolve any civil claim.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what Ken Long, Elizabeth Halverson, Doug Crawford and Caramango are doing now that they are not practicing law in Nevada? Anybody?

Anonymous said...

@3:24 and 3:29 (Jan. 6): The piece in CityLife was written by George Knapp to defend one of his I-Team colleagues.
He danced around the issues and he condemned the judge and the RJ, but he didn't really SAY anything.
At least the RJ interviewed the judge in an effort to "get the truth out."

Also, City Life is an RJ publication. Morons.

Anonymous said...

Well, it's clear he had talked to several people who worked on the case who were there in court when all of this stuff was going down. Just because their names aren't mentioned doesn't mean that the author didn't obtain fatcs from reliable sources to get the truth.

About city life being an RJ publication--so what. Her husband's reach might not extent out to all publications the RJ puts out.

Anonymous said...

About the 13 year old girl:

It is true that it's important to establish a record of liability and that can be done with a jaywalking ticket. However, that doesn't mean that the driver is obsolved of any wrong doing. If you are jaywalking, that doesn't mean that the drivers aroung you still don't have a duty of reasonable care.

As far as the cop giving her mother the ticket, it had to be done one way or another and no matter what way it's done, it's would have pissed the mom off. That being said, he didn't need to do it WHILE she was being rolled into emergency surgery. Many times after an accident like this wherei njuries are severe, there are cops who go to the hospital and cops who stay behind. Lost of people's information is taken down--addresses, phone number, etc. An accident repotr is taken down by the officer. Sometimes people are not cited/charged/arrested etc. (depending on what the vioaltion is) until days, weeks after. It could have waited....even if they had waited until she was out of surgery would have been a lot better.

Anonymous said...

Comments attributed to nobody; dates pulled out of thin air; and an unmitigated attempt to deflect away from bad journalism.

It seems news means nothing these days if it isn't a scandal.

Take your bias against the RJ and shove it up your ass (be sure to remove your head first).

Anonymous said...

"he didn't really SAY anything"...did you not read the article? He said she left twice a week, cutting a complex and lengthy trial short so she could go watch her kid play soccer. Then he argued that this contributed greatly to the reason why trial went so long and why experts were paid double (with county money). This all ended with a jury being held over night, utterly exhuasted, when they had to sift through a lot of complex evidence and make a very important decision--to both the defendant and the dead baby. The fact that she claimed that she "only left early once" was refutted by the claims made in this article.

So, yes, he clearly did do more than bach the RJ and Vega and he was saying something in this article.

Anonymous said...

I read both articles, without an agenda, and I believe Vega, who told the RJ she went to ONE of her kid's soccer games.
The important thing here that everybody seems to be missing is the jury believes it arrived at the proper verdict despite the long hours.
The lawyers, both Reed and Monroe, requested time off.
I'm not saying this was a good way to run a trial, but it has dawned on me perhaps this case never should have been tried in the first place, let alone the second.

Anonymous said...

Are there any other legal websites? I'm afraid the trolls have forced this one to close down. Too bad. Fun while it lasted.

Anonymous said...

@ 01/05/11 @10:04 am

"...but I just couldn't help but make the observation that when I read what you write, I picture an undereducated conspiracy theorist that hates our government blah blah blah..."
January 5, 2011 10:04 AM

You are so far off the mark, it's laughable ... and also laughable that you have nothing to add or refute from the facts presented in the thread on this topic. Your comment is indicative of an extremely uncritical mind, that lacks depth as well as clarity.

Go troll elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:17 pm

Elle has a new legal website: lasvegaslegallife.com

Anonymous said...

There's also Las Vegas Legal News at http://lvlegalnews.com. Not a tabloid but loaded with good stuff for legal eagles.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:17 pm and 2:32 PM

RE: Elle's new website: lasvegaslegallife.com and
http://lvlegalnews.com.

Yes, I've signed up for lasvegaslegallife.com today and will check out lvlegalnews.com. Nice balance with the two for Legal Eagles.

Thanks for these tips.

Perhaps we can gather a Posse to keep the Trolls at bay and/or give them their own sub-space here and call it: "LAWYERS RIDING ROUGHSHOT AND ROGUE".

Eihaa ... roll 'em through, move 'em out, move 'em on, ....Eihaa ...

Anonymous said...

@ 1:19 - I told you, I don't know him or have a dog in this fight so I am not trying to refute what you are claiming. All I was trying to do was point out that you have already said enough times on one blog, now you just sound like a rambling lunatic. Really, I was just trying to help you.

Anonymous said...

@1:05: believe what you want (and I'm not sure why you should "believe" one over the other unless you actually have some knowledge of the facts--either she left early multiple times or she did not) but you are dead wrong about Vega only going once. It's simply not true. You can look at the court transcripts and see for youself--they are public record.

However, whether or not keeping the jury late made a difference, that's another issue. The fact that the jury was kept over night may have not affected the outcome at all. Had then been allowed to sleep, they have returned the same verdict. But they may have not. Either way, we will never know but it would have been fairly simple to make sure that this issue never even arose. The fact that she contributed greatly to the fact that this trial went so long (which she did--it's a fact) and then kept them over night was irresponsible and she was not doing her job. she is supposed to, as the judge, to do everything in her power to make sure that the trial is a fair trial--for both the state and the defendant.

Anonymous said...

You're nobody in Las Vegas law until one of your vanquished, bitter foes anonymously rips on you on WWL.

Anonymous said...

Eh? Say what?

Anonymous said...

Anyone read Patterson's temporary suspension order in the Nevada Lawyer? If you're interested, he got caught masturbating in public in front of two teenage girls.

Anonymous said...

@ 5:29 pm

And the Proverbial Phoenix rises from the ashes ....

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBzJGckMYO4&feature=related

Anonymous said...

200

Blog is dead.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 269   Newer› Newest»