`̀

March 2019 Vol. 41, No. 3

Conversationson DisCovery

PG 3

ranDomthouGhts

PG 2

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE WASHOE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION

The

LaW LiBraryPro Bono

PG 13

sPeCiaLity Courts

PG 9

JuDiCiaL ethiCs

6

PeoPLe

PG 14

RSVP by March 11, 2019. $25 per person for members and $30 for non-members. Register online at www.wcbar.org or call 786-4494.

miLLenniaL minute

PG 8

meDiation

PG 10

LaW CLerK CornerPG 11

Stephanie Sciarani, Deputy General Counsel, with Blockchains, will provide a comprehensive overview of federal, state and select international laws governing blockchain technology. She will also provide an overview of existing blockchain legal developments. For more information, please go to https://www.blockchains.com/resources, to read the treatise, "Blockchain Through a Legal Lens".

Stephanie Sciarani is Deputy General Counsel of Blockchains, LLC. As such, Stephanie works closely with the General Counsel on all of Blockchains’ legal affairs including employment, real property, corporate and acquisition matters. Prior to joining Blockchains, Stephanie worked in a boutique law firm in San Diego where she acted as outside general counsel for more than 50 companies and litigated various business claims. As a native northern Nevadan, Stephanie is excited to be back home in the Silver State and working for a

company that is dedicated to restoring the power back to the individual.

Stephanie is the co-author of Blockchain Through a Legal Lens (January 2019) and author of Morbid Childhood Obesity: The Pressing Need to Expand Statutory Definitions of Child Neglect (2010). In her spare time, Stephanie volunteers as the Risk Prevention Committee Chair for the international Kappa Alpha Theta women’s fraternity where she oversees all risk prevention, investigations and risk enforcement for 150 chapters in the United States and Canada.

Stephanie earned her undergraduate degree from the University of Nevada, Reno in 2007, magna cum laude, and her JD from Thomas Jefferson School of law where she graduated suma cum laude. Stephanie is admitted to practice in Nevada, California and Washington state.

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 2

R a n d o m T h o u g h t s

TheTheThe

The WriT is The official publicaTion of The Washoe counTy bar associaTion

John moore, EditorGina maCLeLLan, Managing Editor

annual subscription ratE for non-MEMbErs of Wcba: $36

Wcba, p.o. box 1548, rEno nV 89505tEl: 775-786-4494 fax: 775-324-6116WWW.Wcbar.org E-Mail: gina @Wcbar.org

prEsidEnt patricia HalstEad VicE prEsidEnt HollY parKEr sEcrEtarY cHandEni sEndalltrEasurEr JacEY prupas sErgEant-at-arMs JoHn MoorE ExEcutiVE dirEctor gina MaclEllan articlEs appEaring in tHE Writ ExprEss tHE ViEWs of tHE autHors and not

nEcEssarilY tHosE of tHE Wcba. for adVErtising call tHE Writ at 775-786-4494. Wcba rEsErVEs tHE rigHt to accEpt or dEnY anY adVErtising.

Printed on recylable paper using vegetable-based ink.

Patricia HalsteadPresident

show your office some Love!

I happen to be writing this article on Valentine’s Day, which will be well past by the time you read it;

but, because love is in the air, I decided to write about how to show your office some love, specifically office morale.

Successful CEO’s will tell you that employees perform best when they are happy. This is backed up by Gallup, which has measured employee “engagement” and determined that engaged workers, meaning workers that are involved, enthusiastic, and committed to their workplace, manifest better customer engagement, higher productivity, better retention, fewer accidents, and 21% higher profitability.

Promoting employee engagement really boils down to the golden rule of treating others how you would want to be treated. Thoughtful gestures can go a long way and a large salary does not compensate for lack of appreciation or a toxic work environment. Working in a law office is stressful. We, as a profession, are dealing with people’s problems and emotions and we need to be aware that our colleagues and employees take that on as well. We need to be cognizant of our own stress levels and work to instill an environment that solves problems without internalizing them.

A healthy office boils down to relationship management. What is the

relationship you are fostering? Are you establishing a friendly environment? Are you reframing problems and treating them as teachable moments? Are you holding unhealthy grudges, and are you abiding by healthy interpersonal boundaries?

Everyone has faults but everyone also has strengths. Are you acknowledging and capitalizing on employees’ strengths? Fundamentally you want a good team. Has your office hired with team goals and fit in mind?

It is also important to remember that your world and your employees’ worlds look very different. You may be managing a million dollar client, but they are managing you (which you know is not always fun). Something that may seem small to you given your big picture is likely large to your employee given his or her more limited role. Keep that in mind and act considerate accordingly.

Build a cohesive team that shares a common goal. Do not feel compelled to retain employees who disrupt the team dynamic and include your team when considering office changes. The classic praise in public, criticize in private is a good rule of thumb, but tailor criticism as concern and room for improvement. Ask for feedback, keep an open dialogue, encourage personal

growth and development, and be clear about expectations.

Office perks can also go a long way. When is the last time you brought support staff coffee or acknowledged a birthday or anniversary? Do you keep your professional employees under thumb or allow them leeway to work in a manner that works for them that remains productive but may not involve traditional “face time?” When someone is late for work are you understanding of the situation or critical without a care as to why? Do you check in and take the temperature of the office? If you don’t, you should.

Listen to your employees, recognize their contributions, thank them for their successes, and challenge them to move forward so they do not feel stagnant and know that they can grow personally and professionally. Foster an attitude of gratitude and remember, your employees are not lucky to have a job, you are lucky to have them so you can have a successful office. Bottom line, good office moral is not just preferable, it is profitable. Take care of your team and they will take care of you.

____________________1Employee Engagement on the Rise in the U.S. by Jim Harter, August 26,

2018 (https://news.gallup.com/poll/241649/employee-engagement-rise.

aspx).

3March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

C O N V E R S A T I O N S O N D I S C O V E R YBy Wesley M. Ayres, Discovery Commissioner

Last month’s article discussed the adoption of recent amendments to the Nevada

Rules of Civil Procedure by the Nevada Supreme Court. The primary focus of that article was on changes to the initial disclosure requirements and the early case conference. This month, I will consider the remaining provisions of NRCP 16.1, starting with its expert disclosure provisions.

Under the amended rules, parties must still disclose any person whom they may use to present expert evidence at trial. See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(A). Unless the parties agree or the court orders otherwise, retained testifying experts will continue to provide reports. But the content of those reports has changed in one respect. Previously, the expert was obligated to provide “the data or other information” considered by the witness in forming his or her opinions. That phrase has been construed broadly by most federal courts to include drafts of expert reports and virtually any communications between counsel and the expert. See, e.g., Republic of Ecuador v. Hinchee, 741 F.3d 1185, 1193-94 (11th Cir. 2013). Together with certain changes to NRCP 26 (to be addressed in a future article), the amended rule avoids that result by adopting language from the analogous federal rule requiring that the report disclose “the facts or data” considered by the witness. See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(B)(ii). Specifically, the phrase “facts or data” was intended to exclude theories or mental impressions of counsel, while requiring disclosure of any facts or data considered by the expert in forming the opinions to be expressed. It is not limited to material “relied upon” by the expert. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)(ii) advisory committee note to 2010 amendment. The specific disclosure requirements for non-retained testifying experts have not substantively changed.

See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(C).The amended rule contains a new

provision dealing specifically with treating physicians, which is found at NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(D). Ordinarily, a treating physician is not viewed as a retained expert, and is therefore not required to provide a report under NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(B). Of course, a party’s disclosure of that non-retained expert must still satisfy the requirements of NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(C), “to the extent practicable” (since a treating physician may be less cooperative than a retained expert in providing the information needed for that disclosure). See id. 16.1(a)(2)(D)(iii). An appropriate disclosure for a treating physician may include that the physician will testify in accordance with his or her medical chart, even if some records contained therein were prepared by another healthcare provider. See id.

The amended rule makes clear that when a treating physician also acts as a retained testifying expert, the physician must provide a report under NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(B). See id. 16.1(a)(2)(D)(i). Moreover, a treating physician’s status as a non-retained expert can change if the party who calls that witness asks him or her to provide opinions outside the course and scope of the treatment provided to the patient. See id. 16.1(a)(2)(D)(ii); see also FCH1, LLC v. Rodriguez, 130 Nev. 425, 433-35, 335 P.3d 183, 189-90 (2014) (finding that trial court abused its discretion by allowing treating physician disclosed as nonretained expert to provide expert opinions formed outside the course of treatment without an expert report). But a treating physician is not required to provide a written report solely because the physician’s testimony may discuss ancillary treatment, or the diagnosis, prognosis, or causation of the patient’s injuries, that is not contained within the

physician’s medical chart, as long as the content of such testimony is properly disclosed under NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(C) (regarding disclosure requirements for non-retained testifying experts). See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(D)(i).

Provisions addressing the timing of expert witness disclosures have not substantively changed. If simultaneous expert disclosures are not appropriate under the circumstances, the parties may stipulate, or the court may order, different disclosure deadlines. Otherwise, initial expert disclosures are due at least 90 days before the discovery cut-off date (which differs from the deadline in federal cases). See id. 16.1(a)(2)(E)(i)(a). Rebuttal expert disclosures are generally due within 30 days after the other party’s initial expert disclosure. See id. 16.1(a)(2)(E)(i)(b). The amended rule makes clear that the rebuttal disclosure deadline “does not apply to any party’s witness whose purpose is to contradict a portion of another party’s case in chief that should have been expected and anticipated by the disclosing party, or to present any opinions outside of the scope of another party’s disclosure.” See id. 16.1(a)(2)(E)(ii). An expert who is identified in an initial disclosure may also serve as a rebuttal expert and offer rebuttal opinions, so long as those opinions are disclosed at the time of the rebuttal expert disclosure, or as a required supplement in accordance with NRCP 26(e)(2). See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(E) advisory committee’s note to 2019 amendment.

As always, expert witness disclosures must be supplemented whenever supplementation is required under NRCP 26(e). See NRCP 16.1(a)(2)(F)(i). Amended NRCP 16.1 further provides that “[i]n general, the disclosing party must move to reopen the discovery deadlines or otherwise seek leave of court in order to supplementally disclose a

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 4

non-retained expert.” See id. 16.1(a)(2)(F)(ii). However, that kind of motion can be avoided if the disclosure is made

(a) in accordance with Rule 16.1(a)(2)(C) [i.e., it provides the information required by that rule];

(b) within a reasonable time after the non-retained expert’s opinions become known to the disclosing party [i.e., this is not available if a party is not diligent]; and

(c) not later than 21 days before the close of discovery.

See id. (emphasis added).Pretrial disclosure provisions have

not substantively changed, but amended NRCP 16.1(a)(3) provides that pretrial disclosures, and any list of objections as described in that rule, must now be filed with the Court. Similarly, the current provisions concerning case conference reports have been retained in amended NRCP 16.1(c), but the amended rule

contains some additional provisions. It provides that supplemental case conference reports cannot alter an existing scheduling order; rather, deadlines set forth in an existing scheduling order remain in effect unless the court modifies the discovery deadlines. See id. 16.1(c)(1)(B). In addition, case conference reports must now include

• “a brief statement of whether the parties did or did not consider settlement and whether settlement of the case may be possible”;• “a written list of the medical providers identified under Rule 16.1(a)(1)(A)(iii)”;• “a statement of the damages computations disclosed under Rule 16.1(a)(1)(A)(iv)”;• “a written list of the insurance agreements disclosed under Rule 16.1(a)(1)(A)(v)”;• “a written list of

experts disclosed under Rule 16.1(a)(2), and a statement indicating whether the identified experts will provide or have provided expert reports;• “a statement identifying any issues about preserving discoverable information”; and• “a statement identifying any issues about trade secrets or other confidential information, and whether the parties have agreed upon a confidentiality order or whether a Rule 26(c) motion for a protective order will be made.”

See id. 16.1(c)(2)(B), (F)-(K).The consequences for a plaintiff’s

failure to timely hold an early case conference or timely file a case conference report are retained in amended NRCP 16.1(e)(1) and (2). Those provisions clarify that a dismissal with prejudice is

5March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

Wes Ayres is the Discovery Commissioner for the Second Judicial District Court. His columns are online and searchable at wcbar.org.

not available for a defendant who serves its answer after the first case conference, unless a party has served a written request for a supplemental conference in accordance with Rule 16.1(b)(2)(A). Appropriate sanctions remain available under NRCP 16.1(e)(3) “[i]f an attorney fails to reasonably comply with any provision of this rule, or if an attorney or a party fails to comply with an order entered under Rule 16.3.” The provision allowing a court-ordered waiver of any or all of the requirements of NRCP 16.1 has been retained, although the rule makes clear that the court must conduct an NRCP 16 conference in that event. See id. 16.1(f ).

Amended NRCP 16.1(d) continues to provide that discovery disputes will be heard by discovery commissioners in districts where they have been appointed, unless the court orders otherwise. The other provisions of former NRCP 16.1(d) have been transferred to NRCP 16.3. Amended NRCP 16.3 identifies the particular powers of a discovery commissioner, which include the power to (a) administer oaths and affirmations; (b) conduct and regulate discovery resolution conferences, hearings on discovery motions, and any other proceeding or conference in furtherance of the commissioner’s duties; (c) take any other action necessary or proper for the efficient performance of his or her duties; and (d) if agreed by the parties or ordered by the court, conduct a settlement conference. See id. 16.3(b).

Amended 16.3 also contains some modifications to the process for objecting to a discovery commissioner’s decisions. If a report and recommendation is entered, any party may file and serve written objections within 14 days after being served with a copy of that report. See id. 16.3(c)(2). The amended rule now expressly provides that if written authorities are filed with an objection, any other party may file and serve responding authorities within 7 days after being served with that objection. See id. An objecting party may not raise new arguments in support of an objection that could have been raised before the discovery commissioner but were not. See NRCP 16.3 advisory committee’s note to 2019 amendment;

see also Valley Health Sys., LLC v. Dist. Court, 127 Nev. 167, 173, 252 P.3d 676, 680 (2011). The amended rule makes clear that the district court reviews a discovery commissioner’s report and recommendation de novo. See NRCP 16.3 advisory committee’s note to 2019 amendment. The court may thereafter (a) affirm, reverse, or modify the discovery commissioner’s ruling without a hearing; (b) set the matter for a hearing; or (c) remand the matter to the discovery commissioner for reconsideration or further action. See NRCP 16.3(c)(3).

JudgE bonniE a. bulla Joins nEVada court of appEals

Judge Bonnie A. Bulla joins the Nevada Court of Appeals March 4, 2019 in Las Vegas. Judge Bulla was selected to serve the unexpired term of Justice Abbi Silver who was elected to the Nevada Supreme Court.

Judge Bulla was appointed Discovery Commissioner for Clark County's Eighth Judicial District Court in January 2007. She served as Discovery Commissioner until her Feb. 13 appointment by Governor Steve Sisolak to the Court of Appeals.

She graduated Summa Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa with a bachelor of science degree in economics from Arizona State University in 1984. She received her juris doctorate degree from Arizona State University in 1987. Judge Bulla is a past president of the Howard D. McKibben Chapter of the American Inns of Court. She has been a member of the Nevada Bar since 1987.

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 6

J U D I C I A L E T H I C SHonorable David Hardy, Second Judicial District Court

Justice Charles M. Merrill (Nevada Supreme Court: 1951-1959).1 Justice Merrill does not leap from the pages of history as a larger-than-life personality, yet the historical records demonstrate he was a judge of great depth and exemplary service. Justice Merrill was born in Hawaii in 1907 and moved to California in 1911 when his parents bought a ranch in Collinsville, on the banks of the Sacramento River. He began his education in a one-room, one-teacher school. He later moved to Piedmont, California, where he graduated from high school.

Justice Merrill graduated from U.C. Berkeley in 1928 with a degree in political science. His personal interests and personality are inferred from his collegiate extracurricular activities: he worked on the student newspaper, played the cello, sang with the glee club, and was a senior varsity yell leader.

Following his undergraduate education, Justice Merrill immediately began legal studies at Harvard Law School, where he graduated in 1931. He then returned to San Francisco and was admitted to the California State Bar. However, “given the economic conditions” at the time, he was unable to find employment. He was referred to Reno attorney Robert Price, who would soon serve as president of the Nevada State Bar. Justice Merrill and his wife moved to Reno where he worked as an associate until becoming Price’s partner in 1934. He continued the practice after Price died in 1940, and later formed a law partnership with John Robinson and Leslie Gray. The Law Firm of Merrill, Robinson & Gray practiced in the First National Bank Building. Justice Merrill’s practice areas were water, mining, and corporate law.

Justice Merrill quickly rose to personal and professional prominence after moving to Nevada. He was

appointed chair of the Board of Bar Examiners and later served on the Board of Bar Governors. He was also active in the Washoe County Bar Association. Justice Merrill was the attorney for the Washoe County Water Conservation District for many years and served as a member of the Lake Tahoe Conference Committee on the Adjustment of Interstate Waters.

Justice Merrill also participated in many civic endeavors, particularly music and singing. He joined the Society for the Preservation and Encouragement of Barbershop Quartet Singing in America and became its youngest president in 1947. He founded and was the first president of the Reno Men’s Chorus, which he also conducted. He was a member of the Associated Male Choruses of America and was a member (and music arranger) of the Bonanza Four Quartet, which made more than 300 appearances for charitable and church organizations. Justice Merrill participated with the Nevada Square Dance Association, Reno Exchange Club, Reno Chamber of Commerce, Nevada Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America, Washoe County Girl Scout Council, and the Kiwanis Club.

In 1950, at a meeting of the Reno Lawyers’ Club, Justice Merrill

announced his candidacy for election to the Nevada Supreme Court seat held by Justice Charles Horsey. At the time, Justice Horsey had not indicated if he would retire or seek re-election. Justice Horsey did seek re-election, which led to a spirited campaign. Justice Merrill was a relentless candidate, making appearances throughout the state. The Nevada State Journal noted that Justice Merrill campaigned “just as strenuously as he does when he is endeavoring to draw harmony out of his barber-shop quartet.” He carried a majority of the counties and won by almost 10 points. Justice Merrill was unopposed in his 1956 re-election campaign.

Justice Merrill earned the confidence of U.S. Senator Alan Bible, who was his political benefactor for appointment to the federal bench. Senator Bible was unable to secure Justice Merrill’s appointment in 1956, but he and Senator Howard Cannon persuaded President Eisenhower to appoint Justice Merrill to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1959. He was the second Nevadan to serve on the federal appellate court.

At the time of his appointment, Justice Merrill’s Nevada Supreme Court colleague Justice Milton Badt said of him: “I think I can say without any hesitation at all that I have never encountered and worked with a keener mind, a more analytical mind, a mind more attuned to not only the abstract justice of the case but to the logic of the arguments of counsel, cutting through many of the issues that have been raised and going unerringly to the meat of the case.”

Justice Merrill participated in several high-profile appeals while on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In 1970, he authored a widely published opinion protecting freedom of the press. See Caldwell v. United States, 434 F.2d 1081 (9th Cir. 1970). In that case, New York

7March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

Times reporter Earl Caldwell challenged a subpoena ordering him to testify before a federal grand jury about his confidential interviews with members of the Black Panther Party. Writing for the majority, Justice Merrill observed “[t]he need for an untrammeled press takes on special urgency in times of widespread protest and dissent. In such time the First Amendment protections exist to maintain communication with dissenting groups and to provide the public with a wide range of information about the nature of protest and heterodoxy.” Id. at 1084-85. Although he acknowledged the competing interests of the grand jury, Justice Merrill ultimately concluded “[t]he very concept of free press requires the news media to be accorded a measure of autonomy; that they should be free to pursue their own investigations to their own ends without fear of governmental inference; and that they should be able to protect their investigative process.” Id. at 1086. Accordingly, the court held Mr. Caldwell was entitled to refuse attendance at the grand jury altogether. Although the ruling was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972), the case would engender debate about reporter’s privilege for many years to come.

Justice Merrill served on the Ninth Circuit until he accepted senior status in 1974. His federal colleague Senior Justice Ben C. Duniway said upon Justice Merrill’s retirement: “He is a delightful associate, courteous to everyone, considerate, hardworking, and efficient. He gets his work done, and promptly. His opinions are models of clarity and conciseness. He is much more than an associate. He is in the eyes of his brothers and sisters, first and foremost a friend—one who is not only admired, but greatly beloved.”

Throughout his life, Justice Merrill enjoyed loyal friendships. In addition to Senator Bible, his former law partner Leslie Gray urged President Nixon to consider Justice Merrill for appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill one of the two vacancies created by the resignations of Justices Hugo Black and John M. Harlan II in 1971. Senator Bible wrote that Justice Merrill is “one of the soundest and ablest in the entire

federal system . . . He has served on many committees and commissions, notably the American Law Institute. He is a westerner and you’ll find he has the high regard of the American Bar Association and leaders in the bar and bench throughout the country. He is a Republican and a conservative of the quality we need on the high court.” President Nixon instead appointed Justices Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist to fill the positions.

Justice Merrill was thoughtful about the law. In an academic speech at the UNR Center for Religion and Life (during a time of national civil unrest) he acknowledged specific laws must adapt to changing circumstances but the “framework [of ] the rule of law must be protected.” Balancing competing interests, he concluded “[i]t is wrong to break the law and it is that assumption that must be preserved. If it is not preserved then the tremendous power of deterrence of the law is lost and law enforcement will fail.” However, he acknowledged an exception for those whose consciences could not accept a law perceived as morally wrong. He further explained, “when a law is challenged on moral grounds, only that law should be challenged through violation only after all other channels for change have been exhausted. And if efforts to change the law fail, the violator should accept punishment.”

Justice Merrill died in San Francisco in 1996 at 88 years of age. He was the last living attorney who argued before the Supreme Court when it still met in the Nevada Capitol. Upon his death, Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Proctor Hug (a fellow Nevadan) said: “We will miss our cherished colleague and his many years of devoted service to our court. He will be remembered as a true gentleman and an outstanding jurist. We in Nevada will particularly feel his loss as he made his home—and his mark—here for almost 30 years before joining the court of appeals.”

The Nevada Supreme Court published a memorial to Justice Merrill on May 23, 2003. Among other tributes, Justice Cliff Young described Justice Merrill as “a witty and very bright man. Everyone had a great deal of

respect for him.” Secretary of State Bill Swackhamer said, “He was a gentleman first, last and always. He was not a man who got much publicity. He didn’t want it.”

______________________________ 1References for this essay include: In Memorium, Honorable Charles M. Merrill, 117 Nev. 999 (2003); Price, Merrill in Partnership, Reno Gazette-Journal, Jan. 3, 1935, at 2; Charles M. Merrill, John E. Robinson, Leslie B. Gray Announce That They Have Formed a Partnership, Reno Gazette-Journal, July 27, 1946, at 14; Judge Merrill Nominated to Appeals Court, Reno Gazette-Journal, Aug. 28, 1959, at 22; Merrill is High Court Candidate, Nevada State Journal, Feb. 28, 1950, at 2; Charles Merrill to Seek Seat on High Court, Reno Gazette-Journal, Mar. 1, 1950, at 13; Merrill Wins High Tribunal Over Horsey, Nevada State Journal, Nov. 9, 1950, at 2; I, Reno Gazette-Journal, July 17, 1956, at 11; Demos Land Republican’s Court Post, Long Beach Independent, Sept. 9, 1959, at 16; Subpenas [sic] and a Free Press, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Nov. 20, 1970, at 10; Judge Merrill Urged for Post on High Court, Reno Gazette-Journal, Sept. 22, 1971, at 29; Jason P. Steed, The Most Important Election Ever, Fed. Law, Dec. 2014, at 4; U.S. Justice: the Law Called Expression of Public Conscience, Reno Gazette-Journal, May 25, 1973, at 12; Charles M. Merrill, SF Gate, Apr. 3, 1996, available at https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Charles-M-Merrill-2987392.php; Merrill Dies, Elko Daily Free Press, Apr. 4, 1996, at 12.

This is number 117 in a series of essays on judicial ethics authored by Judge David Hardy, Second Judicial District Court, Dept. 15.

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 8

M I L L E N N I A L M I N U T EBy: Kelci Binau, McDonald Carano

Your hard work has paid off! You graduated law school and earned the auspicious

title of Attorney at Law. Your first day as an associate at your new firm you practically rode into the front doors on cloud nine. You were received by warm welcomes, smiling faces and were led to your desk, a space you could call your own, where your career as an attorney was sure to blossom. Your phone rang, as you answered thoughts of disbelief ran through your head as you realized “I have my own extension, and someone knows it!” “… I hope you wrote that down, that’s the client matter number, you should be able to find a form in the database and please get the document to me before lunch time” CLICK!

Ah the adventures of a first-year associate. Many tried to warn us of the grave disparities between the endless academic hypotheticals vs. the reality of the client sitting across from us. We are now professionals and what would a new career be without a little self-doubt and the almighty learning curve, right? While in law school we adapted to and learned to navigate the competitive climate. We found our core group of friends that we could trust with our inner most insecurities, and let’s face it, with our course outlines. As associates we have been transported into an unknown realm where navigating the corporate waters and realizing that the elements we memorized in law school are not that useful when drafting a demand letter, which can make us feel like we are in a life raft out at sea. As millennials, we strive for perfectionism and of course want to portray confidence and competence to our employer, so what steps can we take and who can we turn to on those days when we need a tow to bring us back to shore?

Gaining insight into your needs and goals and connecting with a mentor will assist with your transition

MarcH is tHE MontH for MEntorsHip

into practice and will help both you and your mentor achieve a higher job satisfaction. A study published in the Journal of Vocational Behavior, revealed that employees who serve as mentors achieve higher job satisfaction and a deeper level of commitment to their employers while mentees receive tools to help combat job frustration, one-on-one coaching and insight into corporate culture. After working with a mentor for just six weeks, mentees reported feeling reduced levels of stress and anxiety and increased levels of confidence regarding their professions as their mentor taught them the necessary conduct and skills to be successful in their trade.

Dispersed from our trusty law school study groups, counselors and the watchful eyes of our law school professors, many of us question who we can or should turn to as an advisor or a true confidant. While it is oftentimes beneficial to traverse outside of your comfort zone, do not forget the many connections you made while in law school, the judges you interned for, or the attorney who spoke at one of your club meetings; these untapped acquaintances are all potential leads towards finding a mentor. Additionally, many professional attorney groups exist in Washoe County. The Washoe County Bar Association hosts a monthly luncheon where seating is unassigned, which presents the amazing opportunity to sit amongst judges and attorneys in the community. The State Bar of Nevada (the “State Bar”) has a Young Lawyers Section that hosts a variety of events and activities throughout the year and is geared towards newly admitted attorneys who are 36 years or younger.

If you still feel like you need a little push, the Nevada Supreme Court and the State Bar are here to support you. In a collaborative effort to foster your transition into the practice of law, the Court and the State Bar formed

Transitioning into Practice: A Mentor Program for Nevada Attorneys (“TIP”)* to “introduce newly admitted lawyers to the high standards of integrity, professional conduct, professional competence and service to the public.” TIP pairs each newly admitted Bar member with a mentor. Your mentor is an experienced attorney who has demonstrated her/his commitment towards the ethical and professional practice of law and who now, has chosen to be there for you, to become your mentor. Over a six-month period, you and your mentor will schedule time to sit down and discuss various topics, as well as, any questions that you may have regarding navigating the challenging yet rewarding practice of law.

When in doubt just remember, the partners and attorneys at your firm got to where they are today because they reached out and received help; someone called to get them that first interview, took them to their first Washoe County Bar luncheon and offered them sage advice and gave them feedback on their first demand letter. Most attorneys are grateful for the mentors who assisted them along the way and are willing and eager to do the same that was done for them. It is acceptable and necessary for your mental health and career growth to reach out for support. You made it through your first day of law school, and your first day as an associate, now go take a step towards building a meaningful and rewarding mentor/mentee relationship.*For further questions about the TIP program and how to become a mentor please visit www.nvbar.org, call 702-382-2200, or email tip@nvbar.org.

Kelci Binau is an Associate with McDonald Carano in the firm's Business Entities & Transactions and Real Estate & Land Use practice groups.

9March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

Mat rEVisitEd

S P E C I A L T Y C O U R T SBy: Honorable Dorothy Nash Holmes

In 2014, I wrote about “medically-assisted treatment” (MAT), which was new to specialty

courts. I described the MAT then available to people with Opioid1 Use Disorder: Methadone, (used for decades); Naltrexone (in pill and injection form); Naloxone (the heroin “rescue drug”); Buprenorphine and Suboxone (anti-craving drugs). What I did not report was that I spoke with several drug court judges about MAT and none favored it or allowed it in their programs, despite proof that MAT controls cravings and calms the addicted brain.

Turn to 2019, and, boy, have things changed! Washoe County and Clark County now have MAT courts. SAMHSA and DOJ and NADCP2 require training in it and now pay for it with their grants. The Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards3 are the go-to resource for drug court concept, policy and practice. Nevada accepted them in 2018 as the “instructional and aspirational” foundation for the “Nevada Specialty Courts Best Practices and Standards.” So our national and state Best Practices now recommend and encourage the use of MAT in specialty courts.

There is still no MAT for methamphetamine or cocaine or other narcotics or controlled substances. Today’s MAT still only treats opioid users.4 There are, however, more forms of the medications. Subtex is Buprenorphine Hydrochloride (HCL), which comes in a dissolvable sublingual (under the tongue) tablet. Bunavail (Buprenorphine and Naloxone) is a strip (resembling film) that dissolves in the mouth. Zubsolv (Buprenorphine and Naloxone) is also a sublingual tablet. Sublocade is an injection that delivers extended-release Buprenorphine at a controlled rate over approximately one month. There is now Probuphine, a

Buprenorphine implant that can be inserted under the skin and provides about six months of receptor protection and relief from cravings.

The injections and implant are for people who have been stabilized on other forms of Buprenorphine for 90 days. Obviously, they must be administered and monitored by a physician. The Center for Behavioral Health (CBH), at 160 Hubbard Street in Reno, Life Change Center, at 1755 Sullivan Lane in Sparks, and Northern Nevada HOPES (HOPES) on W. 5th St in Reno are reliable resources for MAT.

Nevada received a federal grant to promote MAT. It started in Southern Nevada and now includes Reno, Sparks, Washoe County and rural areas. CBH is the local grantee agency. Consequently, they are providing MAT free of charge and working with others to grow Nevada’s Integrated Opioid Treatment and Recovery Centers (IOTRC) system of “hubs and spokes.”

The IOTRC is the hub and community-based agencies are the spokes. Some provide MAT while others do behavioral health or medical

continued on page 12

For more inFormation anD tiCKets visit WashoeLeGaLserviCes.orG

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 1 0

M E D I A T I O N M A T T E R SBy Margaret M. Crowley, Crowley Mediation, L.L.C.

HoW MEdiation can cHangE tHE World, part i: pEEr MEdiation

"Children are one third of our population and all of our future." Select Panel for the Promotion of Child Health, 1981

Imagine a world where every single one of our children learned effective ways of resolving conflict

from a very young age. Children would be equipped to identify problems, listen before acting and empower other kids to resolve conflicts collaboratively rather than fighting it out. Children would carry these skills with them for their entire lives, applying them personally and professionally. What a difference this could make in the world.

Can this be achieved? Yes, through peer mediation. According to The Resolution Center, a community mediation service in Michigan, “Peer mediation is problem solving by youth with youth. It is a process by which two or more students involved in a dispute meet in a private, safe and confidential setting to work out problems with the assistance of a trained student mediator.” Peer mediation allows kids to change the way they interact with each other and establish a new way of thinking about conflict, disputes and differences.

Research-based peer mediation programs have been in existence since the 1960’s. Many studies have shown that peer mediation programs positively affect school climate and perceptions of school safety, reduce violence, and substantially limit the number of office referrals and school suspensions for poor behavior. Positive outcomes remain the same regardless of the location of the school (urban or rural), the socioeconomic levels of the students as well as their ethnicity and gender. In short, the results from these programs can be impressive. For example, when a program recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, Peers Making Peace, was studied, researchers found a 34% reduction in initial drug use, a 73% reduction in expulsion, a 90.2%

reduction in assaults and a 57.7% reduction in discipline referrals. Peer mediation programs can address a wide variety of school-related conflicts, such as:

Social media problemsRelationship difficulties/harassmentRumor and gossipCheating and stealingRacial and cultural confrontationsVandalismClassroom or extracurricular disputesBullying, minor assaults and fighting

Most programs are structured in a similar way. School administration identifies the need for a program, creates a referral system and forms. Staff members, such as counselors, are assigned to the program. Potential student mediators are identified by school teachers and staff. The students are trained in the mediation process and the requirements of the program. Many schools create campaigns to advertise their peer mediation programs, encouraging kids to use it for conflicts. Mediations generally occur at lunch time and may happen in a classroom, on the playground or any comfortable, neutral setting.

Why are peer mediation programs so successful? Because kids are uniquely suited to help other kids. First, they have a much better understanding of the issues facing other students than adults do. In addition, kids can normalize the conflict resolution process for other kids to make the process age appropriate. Most importantly, it’s easier for peer mediators to empower other students because, unlike adults, student mediators

have no authority over the disputants. By learning dispute resolution skills early, students can use their skills at the secondary or high school level, where it will be particularly beneficial. By this stage in their development, students typically rely on their peers for social and emotional support and welcome opportunities to function independently of their parents and teachers.

Not only is peer mediation great for dealing with school issues, there is evidence that student mediators use their conflict resolution skills outside of the school environment, such as at home or with friends. See, Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation Programs in Elementary and Secondary Schools: A Review of the Research, Johnson & Johnson 1996. There is also evidence that learning conflict resolution skills can enhance academic achievement when combined with subject area learning. Id. Thus, peer mediators are learning to become better students as well as better human beings.

Over the years, some schools throughout Nevada have had the opportunity to create peer mediation programs thanks to grant money. After implementing a program, one Reno school reported, “It is evidently popular to be kind rather than unkind on campus and very few situations involving anger and frustration between the students are occurring.” See, March 6, 2011 Peer Mediation and Conflict Resolution Program Interim Report for 2009-2010 School Year, p. 13. Another local school indicated, “At the conclusion of first year of the program’s implementation, 2009-2010, the incidents of mutual fighting dropped 29%...harassment

continued on page 12

1 1March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

save the Date

2019 District Court ConferenceThe 2019 District Court Conference hosted by Nevada Federal Court will be held in Las Vegas at the Enclave on May 16, 2019, which will offer six (6) CLE Credits.

As lawyers, we are tasked with advocating for the best-interests of our clients. While

the majority of this advocacy occurs outside the courtroom, occasionally, advocacy occurs in the courtroom in the context of civil litigation or criminal prosecution. This piece is a brief introduction to trauma-informed practice in general jurisdiction courts using two scenarios.* As an individual trained in both social work and law, I believe attorneys have the responsibility of ensuring our advocacy recognizes past trauma and is tailored to avoid further trauma.

Trauma-informed advocacy is a method of advocacy which recognizes the potential for trauma and retraumatization in the courtroom. While most of the scholarship in this area is focused on family courts and the juvenile justice system, attorneys practicing in general jurisdiction courts can also harness this approach. Such an approach begins with explaining courtroom rules and etiquette and managing client expectations about courtroom procedures.

Practitioners who appear in court frequently may underestimate the traumatic potential of the courtroom. Courtrooms are rife with foreign rules and formalities which can be traumatizing for those unfamiliar with them. Take this scenario as an example: the plaintiff in a contract dispute is testifying on direct examination about the damages she suffered from a breach of contract. However, her attorney forgot to prepare her for cross-examination. As she attempts to leave the witness stand, the judge tells her to sit back down because she has to answer more questions. The defense attorney grills her while her own attorney sheepishly stares at her from counsel table. When she steps down from the stand, she is

confused about what just happened and is increasingly uncertain that she will win her case.

A trauma-informed approach in this scenario recognizes the importance of explaining courtroom procedures to clients before they come to court. From cross-examination to attire and beyond, clients should be informed of exactly what to expect in the courtroom. Even visiting the courtroom before trial can alleviate a significant amount of anxiety. While attorneys cannot anticipate everything, a basic explanation of courtroom processes—when to stand, timing of examinations, etc.—goes a long way. Giving clients the opportunity to ask questions about these procedures is also an essential piece of advocacy. While these adjustments may seem minor, they have incredible potential to build trust and avoid unnecessary trauma.Individuals’ lives are centered within a complex array of systems which can result in trauma. From child abuse to domestic violence, attorneys often work with vulnerable populations who have experienced significant trauma. Take this scenario as an example: a victim of domestic violence is the first witness to testify against her partner who is on trial for domestic battery. She is extremely nervous and scared of retribution. The deputy district attorney immediately launches into direct examination and questions her in a stoic tone. The deputy district attorney’s rushed demeanor and brusqueness make her feel as if what she’s saying is unimportant. As he rattles off question after question and cuts off her answers, her disillusionment with the criminal justice system only grows.

A trauma-informed approach in this scenario begins with recognizing the extent of the victim’s trauma and the strength it takes to testify against an abuser. A victim of a crime should

be empowered to tell her story and feel heard by the court; empowerment here is essential because this may be the one and only opportunity a victim has to process this abuse out loud. While respecting everyone’s time and recognizing evidentiary prohibitions against narratives, the deputy district attorney in this situation should empower the victim to tell her story, carefully consider her answers and loop her answers into his next question. While it is likely impossible to make this situation comfortable, the communication techniques mentioned above convey empathy and understanding and validate the victim’s experience.

Trauma-informed advocacy is a comprehensive style of advocacy which recognizes the trauma individuals have already experienced and the trauma they may experience in the courtroom. Our advocacy leaves an indelible mark on those we encounter: let’s ensure it’s a trauma-informed one.

*These scenarios are fictional and are intended as illustrations.

Further resources:-National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: Trauma-Informed System of Care-National Center on Domestic Violence, Trauma & Mental Health: Trauma-Informed Legal Advocacy Project (TILA)

an introduction to trauMa-inforMEd adVocacY in tHE courtrooM

L A W C L E R K C O R N E R By Michelle Mowry Law Clerk, Second Judicial District Court

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 1 2

specialty court continued

screening, assessment and treatment. Others make psychiatric referrals and services. Wellness promotion and supported employment is another spoke. Peer-recovery support services is, too. Case management and treatment coordination is a spoke. Mobile outreach and emergency rescue services is another spoke of IOTRC.

“Harm Reduction” through overdose education and Naloxone distribution is a critical spoke, and Reno Municipal Court is doing that. We’ve been providing overdose education and Naloxone awareness classes for more than two years. Now, we have received 200 “overdose rescue kits” from a program sponsored by Ezvio, a pharmaceutical company. They are auto-injectors (like an EpiPen)5 that deliver sufficient Naloxone to revive an overdoser within 20 seconds to two minutes, restoring respiration and life. HOPES is maintaining our supply of these kits and started in February to appear in my courtroom the first Wednesday of each month to provide the kits to anyone requesting one.

In 2015, RMC partnered with HOPES and others to create and support Senate Bill 459, making Nevada the 31st state to allow Naloxone possession and use by third-parties, people other than the drug-user. It is like modern-day “smelling salts” and can be obtained and used by family, friends, anyone in a position to possibly save a life. Naloxone is not addictive, and doesn’t encourage drug use. If the unconscious person isn’t overdosing on heroin, but rather has some other ailment, Naloxone causes no harm or complication; it simply awakens them. Everyone with a memory-deficient elder or an inquisitive toddler in the home needs this as they could unwittingly take pain-pills and overdose. Anyone who knows a drug user should keep this on-hand. It is a life saver.

1The difference between opioid and opiate is the form of the painkiller—natural vs. synthetic. Poppy-based opium (morphine) is a natural form and Heroin and Fentanyl are man-made pill or powder versions. Either form is highly addictive.2Federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and U.S. Department of Justice, and the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. 3Volumes I and II were published by NADCP and were recently revised with updated verbiage.4Only Naltrexone treats both opioids and alcohol. It was designed for heroin or other pain-pill users but surprised the medical professionals when it turned out to also curb the cravings for alcohol. Naltrexone is the daily pill form and Vivitrol® is the 1-month injectable form.5Naloxone comes in regular syringe-form and in nasal inhalers, too.

Judge Dorothy Nash Holmes presides over Dept. 3 in Reno Municipal Court. She is adjunct faculty at TMCC and UNR, and teaches a course on Specialty Courts for the online Justice Management Master’s Degree Program at UNR.

Mediation Matters continued

dropped 42%...violence to others remained at 0 and there were 2 cases of weapons on campus. This program made a major positive impact on Peavine Elementary school during its first year of implementation.” Id. At p. 15.

Peer mediation programs have dramatic, positive effects on the daily lives of children. They offer the hope of a world where people choose collaboration over combat. What an achievement it would be to have these programs in every single school district!

Margaret Crowley is an experienced mediator, Supreme Court Settlement Judge, EEOC Mediator, Second JD Custody & Dependency Mediation Panels, Pro Tem Family Court Master and mediation instructor.

1 3March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

l A W L I B R A R Y / P R O B O N O C O R N E RProject Homeless Connect and

Family ConnectOnce a year, Project Homeless

Connect and Family Connect hold an annual event to extend a helping hand to the homeless community. The 2019 event was sponsored by Catholic Charities of Northern Nevada, Renown Health, Health Plan of Nevada, Sysco Foods, NV Energy, the Peppermill, the Reno Events Center, and the Big Reno Coat Drive. It gives free, same day services like medical care, social services, mental health services, housing information, and more to the homeless and the impoverished in Washoe County. Participants receive services such as free haircuts, two hot meals, groceries, flu shots, and jackets.

This year, Project Homeless Connect was held Tuesday, January 29th, from 8 a.m. to noon at the Reno Events Center. 88 local providers attended. Among those offering help were the Second Judicial District Court, the Reno Municipal Court, and the Reno Justice Court.

The Second Judicial District Court was represented by Elizabeth Beadle, Jessica Burgoon, Kimberly Jones, and Cynthia Vera. They provided

information about how the Law Library, Self Help Center, Filing Office, and Protection Order Help Center can assist with accessing legal information. They assisted approximately 226 people.

Participants had access to public cases, information about court services, and access to selected family court packets and forms.

Judge Clifton of the Reno Justice Court, along with four members of his staff, were in attendance. They provided information, assistance and resolution on criminal, citation and civil cases; including quashing warrants and establishing compliance for criminal and citation cases as well as answering questions regarding landlord tenant issues.

Three Reno Municipal Court Judges were present, Judges O'Neill, Riggs and Nash-Holmes along with their staff Caitlin Skill, Terri Vaus-Wong, Michelle Masi, Linda Cross, Mike Mulreany and Chief Marshal Gregg Deighton. Forty three cases were resolved to completion, one set for trial, one set for arraignment, and one conversion of sentence. Twenty outstanding warrants were quashed, and thirty six homeless defendants were referred to Social Services for further assistance.

The judicial system assisted many in need during the program and look forward to assisting again next year.

Lawyer in the Library Volunteers

Thank you to all our February Lawyer in the Library volunteers. You continue to help fill an ongoing need in our community. If you are not

Washoe Legal ServicesWLS would like to recognize and

thank the following attorneys who have accepted a pro bono case from our organization within the first 2 months of 2019:

Reed AdlishSarah FergusonScott Husbands

Victoria OldenburgMelissa Rosenthal

one already, please consider becoming a Lawyer in the Library volunteer. Volunteers have shared that the program is an excellent way to contribute your time and expertise to those in need. Volunteers in bold have volunteered more than once this year.

Please contact Emily Reed at emily.reed@washoecourts.us or (775) 325-6625 if you would like to volunteer or for further information regarding the Lawyer in the Library program.

Elizabeth M. BittnerRichard F. CornellAudrey Damonte

Joe GormanErin N. Grieve

Bronagh M. KellyMikyla J. MillerJeremy J. NorkGraeme A. Reid

Jennifer M. RichardsBrian J. Saeman

William P. ShogrenMadelyn ShipmanTehan W. Slocum

Caryn R. Sternlicht

March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3 1 4

P E O P L E

WCBA Welcomes New Members!

Frank WardSierra Crest Business Law Group691 Sierra Rose Dr., Ste BReno NV 89511775.448.6070email: fward@sierracrestlaw.com

Karl SmithCoulter Harsh Law403 Hill St.Reno NV 89501775.324.3380 / fax 324.3381email: karl@coulterharshlaw.com

Samantha Horner (Paralegal)Fahrendorf Law Offices201 W. Liberty St., Ste. 202Reno NV 89505775.348-9999 / fax 348-0540email: sam@775law.com

Member MovesThomas BradleyLaw Office of Thomas C. Bradley435 Hill St.Reno NV 89501775.323.5178 / fax 323.0709email tom@tombradleylaw.com

Christine BradyNevada Attorney General's Office100 N. Carson St.Carson City NV 89701775.684.1233email: cbrady@ag.nv.gov

Jerry CarterSierra Crest Business Law Group691 Sierra Rose Dr., Ste BReno NV 89511775.448-6070 / fax 473.8292email: jcarter@sierracrestlaw.com

Dotson LawRobert DotsonJill GreinerMead Dixon5355 Reno Corporate Dr., Ste 100

Reno NV 89511775.501-9400email: rdotson@dotsonlaw.legal, jgreiner@dotsonlaw.legal, mdixon@dotsonlaw.legal

Fahrendorf Law OfficesRobert FahrendorfJoseph Fahrendorf201 W. Liberty St. Ste 202PO Box 3677Reno NV 89505775.348-9999 / fax 348-0540email: bob@775law.com, joe@775law.com

Paul GeorgesonEldorado ResortsVice President Legal & Senior Counsel100 W. Liberty St., Ste 1150Reno NV 89501775.328-0114 / fax 337-9218email: pgeorgeson@eldoradoresorts.com

Orrin JohnsonOrrin Johnson Law611 Sierra Rose Dr., Ste AReno NV 89511775.737-9927 email: orrin@orrinjohnsonlaw.com

Wcba Elections, June 2019

Washoe County Bar Association is looking for a social chair. This is a liaison position to the Board, and is responsible for planning two annual events. The Board consists of five members. WCBA has a staff of one. The Vice President automatically succeeds to President.

The Board meets monthly at a breakfast meeting and holds an occasional meeting as needed. Plans for the upcoming year are discussed at the annual half-day "retreat" held during the summer.

If you are interested, please send a letter of interest to gina@wcbar.org, by Monday, April 8, 2019.

Renee Kelly (Paralegal)Lighthouse Documents1280 Terminal Way, Ste 28Reno NV 89502 775.954-8473email: renee@lighthousedocs.com

1 5March 2019, Vol. 41, No. 3

E v e n t ssee wcbar.org/events for details and registration

MARCH

6 Douglas-Carson Legal Professionals meet for lunch and CLE at noon at Red’s Old 395 Grill, Carson City. Speakers are announced on website www.douglascarsonlegalprof.org.

13 WCBA Luncheon, 12 noon, Harrah’s, Blockchains, 1 hour CLE credit. Register at www.wcbar.org/events.

15 & 16 State Mock Trial Competition. Scoring judges needed. Use the sign up form below.

2019  HIGH  SCHOOL  MOCK  TRIAL  STATE  COMPETITION    

March  15  &  16,  2019  

SCORING  JUDGES  NEEDED

Name:______________________________________________________________________________    

Office  Phone:  ____________________________    

Cell#______________________  (in  case  we  need  to  alert  you  to  any  last  minute  changes)  

E-­‐-­‐mail:  ____________________________________________________________________________    

 

Yes,  I  can  be  a  scoring  judge  at  the  State  Competition  on  Friday,  March  15  

I  can  participate  at  

____3:30  pm  ____  5:30  pm  

Yes,  I  can  be  a  scoring  judge  at  the  State  Competition  on  Saturday,  March  16.  

I  can  participate  at  

____8:30  am  ____  11:00  am      

.

Thank  you!  

Please  fax  to  324-­‐6116  or  email  to  gina@wcbar.org

 

sparks municipal Courthouse –

will be closed April 15, 2019 through April 18, 2019 for renovations. The phones, fax machine, and computers will not be operational during this time. For urgent,

time sensitive matters only, please call (775) 232-8720.

SAVE THE DATE

WCBA Member Appreciation Wine Tasting

April 12, 2019 ~ 5:00 p.m.Skyline Kitchen & Vine

2995 Skyline Blvd Reno NV

RSVP to gina@wcbar.org

save the Date

2019 District Court ConferenceThe 2019 District Court Conference hosted by Nevada Federal Court will be held in Las Vegas at the Enclave on May 16, 2019, which will offer six (6) CLE Credits.

c h a n g e s e r v i c e r e q u e s t e d

Prsrt stD u.s. PostaGeP a i Dreno, nevaDaPermit no. 418

The

P o s t o F F i C e B o x 1 5 4 8 , r e n o , n e v a D a 8 9 5 0 5

C l a s s i f i e d s Please visit www.wcbar.org/classifieds for full job descriptions & deadlines.

serviCes

The publication of any advertisement should not be deemed as an endorsement by the Washoe County Bar Association nor should any previously published advertisement be considered as precedent for future publication of the same or similar content.

emPLoyment

TWO ADJOINING OFFICE SPACES available, 534 sq. ft. and 203 sq. ft. Reception area and parking available. 247 Courts Street. Please call Theresa at 775-323-8136.

THREE OFFICES LOCATED IN THE HISTORIC 20th Century Building, directly across from the Truckee River in downtown Reno. Inquiries, please contact 775-322-3475.

LEGAL RESEARCH & WRITING 20+ years experience at the Nevada Supreme Court, now available on a freelance basis for research and writing projects. Briefs, petitions, motions, etc. tlindeman@appellatesolution.com 775-297-4877.

LAWYER PROFESSIONAL ERRORS AND OMISSIONS INSURANCE PROGRAM. Altus Insurance Agency, Division of Orgill-Singer & Associates, has exceptional value for your Law Office. Over 30 years of serving Nevada. Contact: John Maksimik CIC, CRM at 775-398-2525 or email jmaksimik@orgillsinger.com.

oFFiCe sPaCe

E S TA B L I S H E D S M A L L LITIGATION firm has immediate opening for associate. Strong writing skills a must. Salary DOE. All inquiries in strictest confidence to RHill@richardhilllaw.com.

JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP – The Third Judicial District Court in Yerington, Nevada, is accepting applications for a law clerk for immediate hire, also, accepting applications for the August 2019 term. Legal writing skills a must. Submit your cover letter, resume, writing sample, reference list, and unofficial transcript to arossi@lyon-county.org. For additional information, contact Anne Rossi at 775-463-6571 ext. 1.

NEVADA LEGAL SERVICES (NLS) strengthens communities across Nevada by ensuring fairness and providing equal access to justice. We are a non-profit legal aid organization providing free legal services to low income people in every county in Nevada. Our primary source of funding is through a grant from the federal Legal Services Corporation. Please visit www.wcbar.org/classifieds for more information.

FAMILY LAW ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY NEEDED in a busy, medium-sized, well-established Reno law firm. Applicant must have 1-5 years’ experience and be licensed to practice in Nevada. Successful applicant will have the opportunity for immediate work in our Family Law Department. Good academic, writing, and computer skills required. Excellent working conditions and benefits offered. Incentive based pay. Resumes will be kept confidential. To apply, submit a letter of interest, resume, and writing sample to: tfritsen@renonvlaw.com.

VOLUNTEER ATTORNEYS FOR RURAL NEVADANS (VARN), a nonprofit law firm in Carson City, is seeking an Immigration Staff Attorney and

a Staff Attorney to counsel, and represent victims of domestic violence in family law matters. Please visit www.varn.org for more information.

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Nevada is accepting applications for Lawyer Representatives. Lawyer Representatives provide vital input to the Court on a myriad of issues affecting the operations of the federal courts including but not limited to: rule changes; development of new programs; planning of conferences; and the expenditure of funds from the non-appropriated account.

To be considered for one of these positions, you must be: 1) admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court of Nevada and actively involved in federal practice; 2) interested in the purpose and framework of the Circuit Conference and willing and able to actively contribute to the planning of the District Conference; and 3) willing to assist in implementing conference and district court programs with local bar associations. Lawyer Representatives are also expected to attend the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.

Lawyer Representatives are elected to serve a three-year term.

If you are interested in serving as a Lawyer Representative, please submit a letter of interest detailing your federal experience and reasons you would like to be considered. Letters of interest may be emailed to: NVD_LawyerRep@nvd.uscourts.gov, or hand delivered or mailed to: Ms. Debra K. Kempi, District Court Executive, Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 1334, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

Letters of interest must be received by the close of Friday, May 17, 2019. A list of finalists will be selected by the Court and submitted to the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Nevada for the final selections. Please contact Ms. Kempi at (702) 464-

5456 with questions regarding the role of a Lawyer Representative or the selection process.