JENNIFER ABRAMS SETTLES with SANSON—for $155K! DATELINE:

JENNIFER ABRAMS SETTLES with SANSON—for $155K! DATELINE:

Clark County Nevada

June 11, 2021

 

Las Vegas, Nev., (June 4, 2021). The newsflash, apparently official, Jennifer Abrams has paid $155,000 to settle-up with Steve Sanson and Veterans In Politics, International (“VIPI”).

ABRAMS SETTLES for $155K

Moments ago, our editorial staff learned that local attorney, Jennifer V. Abrams, and the Abrams & Mayo Law Firm recently entered into a settlement agreement with Steve Sanson and VIPI. The Abrams Parties agreed to pay $155,000 to resolve the parties’ ongoing litigation.

Our editorial staff was informed that Abrams and her firm have already paid the settlement in full—$155k.

We presume the lion’s share of the $155k will go to the lawyers.

The lawsuit is continuing in district court. Louis Schneider a Nevada Attorney remains as a defendant. After the Nevada Supreme Court almost entirely upheld the district court’s prior decision to grant an anti-SLAPP motion, Schneider sought fees and costs and dismiss the remaining claims. Those motions are still pending.

SANSON SPEAKS!

Our editorial staff spoke with Steve Sanson, who explained that the settlement agreement has no confidentiality clause. “Well, Abrams wanted confidentiality, but I said, NO!” explains Sanson, “This is about freedom of speech and I took an oath to defend the Constitution along with our fundamental liberty interests in freedom of speech. This case started with Jennifer Abrams suing to silence me and the public has an interest in knowing what happens in anti-SLAPP cases.”

THE BACKSTORY

Abrams is a controversial divorce attorney—who some see as emblematic of the chronic problems that plague the family court. Employees of Abrams’ law office run a Facebook hater group where they openly taunt and bully parents fighting for custody.

Sanson criticized Abrams’ sketchy courtroom conduct. Then Abrams retaliated—by filing a defamation lawsuit against Sanson, VIPI , and all its officers! (Holy guacamole!)

But Abrams’ defamation lawsuit was baseless. Abrams had no likelihood of prevailing on her specious defamation claim (and she knew it). Instead, it seemed that Abrams calculated her lawsuit for one purpose—chilling Sanson’s speech-related activities.

Abrams thought her defamation lawsuit would shut down Sanson’s criticisms of her shady courtroom conduct. But Abrams never counted on the indomitable fighting spirit of a United States Marine! “OO-rah!”

In response to Abrams’ half-stepping defamation lawsuit, Steve Sanson countered with an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss—and Abrams got knocked out! It was epic! Sanson handed Abrams a stunning upset defeat! Much like the Lakers victory over the Supersonics back in 1989!

THE LITIGATION

It was long, arduous litigation. Abrams lost in the trial court, then she appealed, but again, she (almost entirely) lost. It wasn’t even a valiant fight. It was just sad. Some legal observers speculate on whether Abrams was stubbornly prolonging her inevitable defeat—trying to prove a point. If so, the only point is that Abrams paid $155,000 (ouch!). Sanson showed himself to be a noble defender of First Amendment liberties!

In the court, Steve Sanson and VIPI established proved that his criticisms of Abrams’ courtroom conduct are free speech—protected by the First Amendment! This means that Sanson has a constitutional right to criticize Abrams—regardless of whether she is offended! Sanson’s triumph over Abrams was a ginormous victory for free speech enthusiasts nationwide!

Sanson added, “I am glad the Nevada Supreme Court correctly ruled that an attorney’s courtroom conduct is a matter of public interest, which we can discuss publicly! With all due respect to Ms. Abrams, she must learn to accept criticisms—especially when they’re valid.”

“And, I’d like to thank my lawyer, Maggie, McLetchie—a heavy hitter—a First Amendment guru—who always had faith in me,” says Sanson who added, “and I wish to thank her associates, the hard-working  Leo Wolpert, and  Alina Shell. Without these talented individuals, this landmark decision would not have been possible! I also want to give a shout-out to Anat Levy who always has my back!”

LEGAL SHOCK-WAVES

The Nevada Supreme Court ruling in Abrams vs. Sanson has sent shockwaves through the corridors of legal power statewide! The high court precedent is clear and unambiguous. The Nevada Supreme Court wholeheartedly supports free speech!

The VIPI editorial staff spoke with our legal correspondent, T. Matthew Phillips, a First Amendment aficionado, who explained, “What we do in life—echoes in eternity.” Phillips added, “When Carson City enacted our state’s anti-SLAPP statutes, they had in mind Jenny Abrams’ frivolous lawsuit against Steve Sanson.

Justice was served!”

We were also fortunate to speak with a world-renowned constitutional expert, Maggie McLetchie, who told our staff, “I’m pleased the parties were able to reach an amicable resolution.”

EPILOGUE

“She sued me to stifle my free speech,” says Sanson, “and the reason she tried to stifle my free speech was to hide her own misconduct.” Sanson added, “If you see something, say something, right? So, I see a shyster lawyer, I say something … she files a shyster lawsuit … she gets slapped out of the water! $155 thousand smackeroos! Cha-Ching! Thank you, please come again!”

Our editorial team wondered whether there’s any legal insight that this litigation may offer—as a learning experience. T. Matthew Phillips explained, “Never underestimate your opponent.” Phillips reminds us, “That’s straight outta Sun-Tzu! Jenny Abrams underestimated a tough-as-nails United States Marine, who basically opened a can of whoop-ass with a side o’ fries and a triple-thick chocolate shake!”

THE WILLICK FACTOR

Note also, the legal battle rages on between Sanson and Marshal Willick another divorce attorney. Remarkably, Willick pulled the same stunt as his girlfriend, fiancée, wife (who knows) Jenny Abrams. And, like his girlfriend, Sanson served up a “how-do-you-do!” Willick now back-peddles, desperately trying to dismiss his own lawsuit against Sanson.

Stay tuned!

VETERANS in POLITICS INTERNATIONAL (“Where Change Happens!”)

Please click on the link below to view Saturday’s show: Tahra Violet self-healing on the Veterans In Politics Video Internet talk-show

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqjZwuTykcg&t=209s

Read More –>

NO FREE RIDE for HARTER!!

NO FREE RIDE for HARTER!!

On April 5, 2021, a federal lawsuit was filed by Ali Shahrokhi and T. Matthew Phillips against family court judge, Mathew Harter.  [Shahrokhi, et.al. vs. Harter, 2:21-cv-00557-APG-BNW].

The lawsuit seeks a court order removing Harter from the bench—for violating Plaintiffs’ 14th Amendment right to expect a “fair judiciary.”

This federal lawsuit against Harter alleges that the 14th Amendment guarantees the people’s fundamental right to expect a “fair judiciary”—the cornerstone of democracy.  However, where judges commit crimes—such as fraud and perjury—there can be no “fair judiciary.”

Harter must go!

The lawsuit alleges that Harter committed bankruptcy fraud, perjury, and concealment of assets; and, because of these crimes, Harter’s mere presence on the bench “offends traditional notions of a fair judiciary,” which violates Plaintiffs’ federally protected rights under the 14th Amendment.

HARTER GETS a FREE RIDE

In this federal lawsuit, the Nevada Attorney General represents Harter—for free.  But Plaintiffs challenge this free legal representation!

Harter should have to pay for his own lawyers!

First of all, the Nevada Attorney General (A.G.) has already denied Veterans In Politics International’s complaint about an investigation against Harter, concerning the bankruptcy indiscretions, therefore, the A.G. is now conflicted-out.

The A.G. is in no position to represent Harter concerning allegations of Bankruptcy fraud because the representation creates blatant conflicts of interest.

The A.G. should NOT represent Harter and for two reasons—(a) Harter committed bankruptcy fraud and the people should not have to pay to defend his conduct, and (b) Harter is being sued for conduct “off the bench,” and because the operative acts occurred “off the bench,” Harter is not entitled to a state-paid attorney.

What does the law say?

Well, it says that Harter is entitled to a state-paid lawyer in lawsuits “based on any alleged act or omission relating to the person’s public duties or employment,” [NRS § 41.0339].

So, did Harter’s BK filing relate to Harter’s public duties or employment?  No!  Therefore, no free ride for Harter.

In addition, there must be a determination that the acts in question happened in “good faith,” [NRS § 41.0339].  But Harter cannot show good faith—because he committed “fraud” in the bankruptcy court!

MOTION to DISQUALIFY

Plaintiffs Shahrokhi and Phillips made a motion to disqualify Harter’s attorneys-of-record, i.e., Nevada Attorney General’s Office.  This motion is now pending before a federal judge.

Plaintiffs argue that the A.G. must be disqualified because the acts that give rise to the lawsuit—Harter’s personal bankruptcy—did not arise within the scope of Harter’s employment as a judge.  In addition, Harter’s personal bankruptcy (obviously) came in “bad faith,” [NRS § 41.0339.1(b)].

Remarkably, the A.G. argues that the state may represent Harter because his B.K. filing, “relates to [Harter’s] public duties or employment.”  But this argument is absurd!  The A.G. argues that bankruptcy is part of a judge’s official duties!

Judges have duties to file bankruptcies?  (Who knew?)   Perhaps the federal court will once-and-for-all resolve the thorny issue of whether filing bankruptcy is part of a judge’s official duties (or not).

BEST INTERESTS of THE STATE

The A.G. next argues that the state may represent state-court judges when representation is in the best interests of the state, [NRS 228.170(1)].  The A.G. told the court that the defense of Harter is in the best interests of the State of Nevada.  But Plaintiffs wonder—how is defending Harter in the best interests of the state?

According to the A.G., “Nevada has an interest in protecting its judicial officers from being bankrupted by means of having to defend civil lawsuits brought by disgruntled former litigants.”  Oh, how ironic!—The A.G. worries about Harter going bankrupt?!  No worries.  HARTER won’t again be eligible to pull another bankruptcy until 2024.

Does the A.G. ever worry about the countless families that Harter bankrupts?

Plaintiff, T. Matthew Phillips stated:  “Harter’s BK was on his own personal time, therefore, attorney’s fees must be funded on his own personal dime.  Get it?”

Plaintiff Ali Shahrokhi was direct:  “It is a waste of public funds.  He must pay for his own attorney.  Does the state give Harter a free lawyer if Harter is in a car accident driving to the movies on Saturday night?  Attorney General must be disqualified.”

However, the A.G. refuses to quit as Harter’s attorney!  The state’s managing attorney is none other than Steve Shevorski who, much like Tom Petty, just “Won’t Back Down.”  Shevorski insists there is no conflict of interest and that the B.K. filing was part of Harter’s public duties and therefore, Harter is entitled to a free, state-paid attorney.

EPILOGUE

Harter committed bankruptcy fraud—in plain view of the general public—and under the nose of a federal judge.  Harter survived complaints to the U.S. Trustee’s Office, the Commission on Judicial Discipline, and the Nevada Attorney General. Recently Veterans In Politics International filed another complaint, this time with the Nevada Commission on Ethics, lets see if they joined the crowd to protect a judge that commits a criminal act.

Harter continues to sit on the bench in judgment of others.

As long as Harter remains on the bench, there can be no “fair judiciary” in Nevada.  Stay tuned for the results of the motion to disqualify the A.G. as Harter’s attorney.

Please click on the video testimony before the Clark County Board of County Commissioners:

Mathew Harter Clark County District Court Judge Family Division is a Criminal on the Bench!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVYGM64r_wM&t=1s

VETERANS IN POLITICS INT’L (“Where Change Happens!”)

Read More –>

Briana Johnson Clark County Assessor hands-on working knowledge of the Department!

Briana Johnson Clark County Assessor hands-on working knowledge of the Department!

Clark County Nevada

May 29, 2021

 

Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Briana Johnson Clark County Assessor.

The election year 2022 is right around the corner. On the ballot will be the Clark County Assessor.

Johnson a Las Vegas Native graduated from UNLV with a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration. Johnson has been in the Assessor’s Office for over 26 years and excelled through the ranks.

Johnson has a hands-on working knowledge of the entire Assessor’s Office.

Office of the Clark County Assessor:

The Assessor values all property subject to taxation. The Assessor is required by Nevada law to discover, list, and value all property within the County. The property is assessed at 35% of its current appraised value. In addition to the parcels of real property (land, homes, commercial buildings), the Assessor must value personal property including businesses from lavish multi-million dollar casinos to one-person operations, manufactured homes, aircraft, and any other personal property which is taxable. The Assessor collects personal property tax only as of the ex-officio treasurer of the County.

About the Clark County Assessor:

Briana Johnson was elected Clark County Assessor on November 6, 2018.  Prior to being elected, she proudly served the public for over 26 years in the Assessor’s Office.  She started in 1995 and held various positions in the Appraisal Division, including Manager of Property Appraisal, prior to being promoted to Assistant Director of Assessment Services in 2016.

As Assessor, Briana Johnson oversees the daily operations of the Office and the assessment of approximately 775,000 parcels, 25,000 manufactured homes, and 45,000 businesses in Clark County.  In addition, she supervises the processing of approximately 80,000 exemptions for the Blind, Veterans, and Surviving Spouses.

Johnson is a native of Las Vegas who graduated from Valley High School.  Johnson later graduated from the University of Nevada Las Vegas and received her Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration.  Briana Johnson holds a Property Tax Appraiser Certificate in both real and personal property from the State of Nevada.

Johnson’s professional affiliations include the International Association of Assessing Officers and the Nevada Assessors Association.  Johnson is also a member of Toastmasters International.

Please click on the links below to be informed:

Clark County Assessor:

www.clarkcountynv.gov/government/assessor/about.php

Click on the video:

Briana Johnson Clark County Assessor on the Veterans In Politics Video Internet talk-show.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb-1r0nf-js&t=205s

 

Citizens Review Board is a Board of “CLOWNS”

Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Giano Amado Judicial Activist.

Amado has been championing legislative reform because of the tremendous corruption that has plagued the family court system. Amado was motivated by the corruption at the hands of Mathew Harter Clark County Family Court Judge.

Amado would like to eliminate qualified immunity, Amado discussed his victory from the Nevada Supreme Court when he received an order for Reversal and Remand on June 29, 2020, against Harter.

In addition, Amado also received a Disqualification from the Nevada Supreme Court because of bias reasons again, against Judge Harter in November 2020.

Amado said that Judge Harter has destroyed his daughter’s life and the lives of his family that he can never get back.

Amado went before the Las Vegas City Council requesting that we form a Public Citizens Review Board to oust corrupt elected officials.

Amado state that the LVMPD Citizens Review Board is a “Circus” that is there to protect corrupt police officers and not the citizens they have violated.

Click on the video:

Giano Amado will discuss the need for a Public Citizen Review Board to oust a corrupt elected official

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dze3SAost3U&t=319s

 

Steve Sanson President of Veterans In Politics request a major overhaul of the LVMPD Citizens Review Board before the Las Vegas City Council

Click on the video:

Sanson President of Veterans In Politics request a major overhaul of the LVMPD Citizens Review Board

www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5LSb0ZPLB4&t=56s

Jac Lindell

Many years ago I was appointed to the citizen’s review board but after my 1st hearing (which resulted in metro revising their policy based on my recommendation) I kept from hearing further cases for applying common sense and my refusal to wear a shirt and tie….. the ides of a board is great, the lady that runs it needs to go and people with some background or at least common sense need to serve on board…. when I am stopped I always disclose I have a CCW and where my weapon is (right front pocket) because I know the officer may not have run scope on me when he pulled me over and as you say to get a CCW I had to pass an extensive background search and I am told no one with a CCW permit has ever committed a crime with their weapon…. that cop needed a reprimand at the least.

Read More –>

Civil Rights Attorneys should focus on Family Court!

Civil Rights Attorneys should focus on Family Court!

 

Where the Rule of Evidence does not apply!

 

Clark County Nevada

April 28, 2021

 

Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Megan and Jason Snow as they discuss numerous Civil Rights violations in a Clark County Family Courtroom.

Jason Snow married Megan Snow both live in the same household. Jason Snow has been a step-father to his wife’s daughter for the past five years.

Megan Snow is deemed a vexatious litigant preventing her from defending herself and fighting for her child. This same hypocritical rule does not apply to overzealous attorneys who file tons of documents just to increase attorney’s fees on both sides.

Megan Snow is not allowed to file any more paperwork on her case, custody modification is to be removed from her vocabulary, and if she does file for modification she would be “sanctioned” so ordered by Family Court Judge Soonhee “Sunny” Bailey.

What happened to the right to a fair trial?

Jason Snow has to leave his home for two days when his wife Megan Snow has visitation with her daughter. Jason Snow has to find somewhere else to live every Thursday and Friday since 2018, leaving his wife, his biological 3-year-old son with Megan Snow and his step-daughter.

It’s alright for Jason Snow to live with his 3-year-old biological son, but it’s not alright for him to be around his 7-year-old step-daughter, just because Megan Snow’s ex does not like Jason Snow.

There is absolutely no reason why Jason Snow should be removed from his home when his step-daughter arrives for her court-ordered visitation. With no end in sight. Is this in the best interest of the child?!

Where is the ACLU?

The US Constitution is eliminated in Clark County Family Courts.

A Congressional Investigation and a Federal lawsuit have to be in place because our local government has failed voters in family court.

Just when you believe you have heard everything. Listen to this explosive interview.

Megan & Jason Snow discuss Civil Rights Violations in family court on Veterans In Politics Talk

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGq0CcPx254

Read More –>

FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILED against CLARK COUNTY JUDGE

FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILED against CLARK COUNTY JUDGE

Clark County Nevada

April 8, 2021

 

On April 5, 2021, a federal lawsuit was filed against family court judge, Mathew Harter.  [Shahrokhi, et.al. vs. Harter, 2:21-cv-00557-APG-BNW].  The lawsuit seeks a court order removing Harter from the bench—for violating Plaintiffs’ 14th Amendment right to expect a “fair judiciary.”

GROUNDBREAKING LAWSUIT

The lawsuit contends that the 14th Amendment guarantees the people’s fundamental right to expect a “fair judiciary,” and, where judges commit crimes—such as fraud and perjury—there can be no “fair judiciary.”

The lawsuit alleges that Harter committed bankruptcy fraud, perjury, and concealment of assets; and, because of these crimes, Harter’s mere presence on the bench “offends traditional notions of a fair judiciary,” which violates Plaintiffs’ 14th Amendment rights.

According to Plaintiff, Ali Shahrokhi, “We have no hope in family court—especially when we see a family court judge get away with fraud and perjury—and still remain on the bench—to sit in judgment on others—operating a cash-for-kids operation.  It is beyond disgusting how they think they can violate our constitutional rights under the color of law.  I refuse to allow thieves to affect my son’s life.”

The lawsuit alleges that Harter’s mere presence on the bench is a “daily reminder of the pall of corruption that hangs over Clark County courts.”  The lawsuit demands that “Harter must go.”

JUDICIAL COMMISSION DROPS the BALL

In fall 2020, Veteran In Politics, Int’l, (VIPI), filed a complaint with Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.  However, on Jan. 19, 2021, the Commission denied the VIPI complaint—citing the statute of limitations.

But Commission attorney, Paul Dehley, misunderstands the statute of limitations.  According to the lawsuit, the statute of limitations may have expired on Harter’s failure to “comply with the law,” [NCJC Rule 1.1], however, the statute of limitations never expires on Harter’s “appearance of impropriety,” [NCJC Rule 1.2].

Co-Plaintiff, T. Matthew Phillips, explains: “Yeah, Harter’s failure to comply with the law may now be a stale-dated ethical violation, however, the sun never sets on Harter’s appearance of impropriety.”

EFFORTS to REMOVE HARTER

Veterans in Politics, Int’l, for some time, has been trying to remove Harter from the bench.  But it has proved a daunting task.

Unfortunately, “recall” is not an option because the Nevada Supreme Court—in the name of “job security”—declares that the People cannot recall judges.

Veterans in Politics, Int’l, recently lodged a complaint with Nevada Attorney General, Aaron Ford.  But sadly, Aaron Ford refused to act making claims in a generic letter that was not part of the complaint.

The U.S. Trustee’s Office was made aware of Harter’s bankruptcy fraud; however, for reasons not entirely clear, the U.S. Trustee fails to act.

Despite multiple complaints to state and federal agencies, Harter still sits on the bench.  But how can this be?  Is Harter super well-connected?  Or is Clark County corruption so pervasive that no gov’t official can legitimately point a finger at Harter?

HARTER’S BANKRUPTCY

On Dec. 21, 2015, Mathew Harter, (and his wife, Brandie P. Harter), filed for Ch. 7 bankruptcy in U.S. District Court, Las Vegas, [Public Case No. 15-17012-LEB].

According to the lawsuit—

  • Harter submitted a fraudulent income statement to the bankruptcy court, falsely declaring an income of $-0-;
  • Harter committed perjury in his income statement to the bankruptcy court, lying about his monthly income;
  • Harter failed to disclose to the U.S. Trustee that he had come into possession of a single-family home worth over $300,000;
  • Harter committed mortgage fraud on a V.A. home loan.

Harter committed bankruptcy fraud in “plain view” of the general public—and under the nose of a federal judge.  One shudders to imagine the biting atrocities that take place in the private sphere of Harter’s tortured courtroom—where sealed family court cases lay beyond public scrutiny.

On a more somber note, should the reader pause to consider, where public officials are underwater in their personal finances, it makes them more susceptible to bribery.

BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN

VIPI member, Giano Amado recently disqualified Harter from his own family law case in the Nevada Supreme Court case# 81098-COA and 79122-COA NV.  (“OO-rah!”)  Determined to remove Harter from the bench, Amado and Veterans In Politics sponsored several billboards shedding light on Harter’s notorious bankruptcy fraud.  These billboards caused a public outcry and made a tremendous impact on public opinion.

Phillips explained: “Harter’s continued presence on the bench is a prolonged insult, a gob of spit in the face of parents, a kick in the pants to truth, justice, and the American way.”

STATUTE of LIMITATIONS

The statute of limitations for bankruptcy fraud and perjury is five (5) years, [18 U.S.C. § 3282].  However, where debtors conceal assets, the 5-year limitations period begins to run on the date the court grants discharge, [18 U.S.C. § 3284].  In Harter’s bankruptcy, the discharge happened in Nov. 2016—which means the statute of limitations on “concealment of assets” will not expire until Nov. 2021—which means it’s not too late to indict Harter.

THE STAIN of JUDICIAL CORRUPTION

The lawsuit alleges that Harter “violates every moral precept of what it means to be a judge.”

Plaintiff Shahrokhi stated, “I came to America from Iran for constitutional freedoms, not a bottom-feeder judge to decide how I and my son live our lives.  I don’t need a bankrupt, criminal to decide my son’s future.  I am a fit parent and I decide what takes place in my son’s life.”  Shahrokhi added, “That man does not deserve to be called “Your Honor.”

Steve Sanson President of Veterans In Politics International stated the following: “It’s a shame that our own state and local government cannot and will not protect the public from this type of behavior in our judiciary. Instead protects each other and screw the voters who put them in office.”

Other Related Articles:

Judge Committed Fraud on Bankruptcy Filings!

veteransinpolitics.org/2019/12/judge-committed-fraud-on-bankruptcy-filings/

Criminal Judge-committed Fraud & Perjury, nobody bats an eye!

veteransinpolitics.org/2020/12/criminal-judge-committed-fraud-perjury-nobody-bats-an-eye/

A CORRUPT JUDGE IS A GREAT VERMIN!!

veteransinpolitics.org/2020/09/a-corrupt-judge-is-a-great-vermin/

 

VETERAN in POLITICS INTERNATIONAL – “Where Change Happens”

Read More –>

😊

LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE SETTLE with VIPI PRESIDENT!

DATELINE—Las Vegas, Nev. (March 17, 2021).  Sanson and LVMPD have buried the hatchet!  The newsflash—now official—Las Vegas Metro Police have settled-up with Veterans In Politics International (VIPI) President, Steve Sanson!  Not wishing to go to trial, LVMPD paid to Sanson the sum of $20,000!  “OO-rah!”

Back in October 2020, VIPI President, Steve Sanson, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit—against Las Vegas Metro Police Dept. and Officer Raul Pinal—for an incident that took place back in 2019—just a few short blocks from family court—600 N. Pecos Rd.—the Bowels of Hell!

According to official court documents, on March 22, 2019, Sanson had just left the family courthouse—when he was suddenly pulled over by Metro!  Yeah, it smelled fishy to us too!  It just sounds, well, greasy!  Ya know?

Sanson still believes that certain elements within family court used Metro Police to “stalk” him and pull him over—under false pretenses.  But that’s all behind us now!  The matter has been amicably resolved.  😊

Sanson had filed a federal civil rights lawsuit (under 42 U.S.C. 1983) alleging violation of Sanson’s “substantive due process” rights under the Fourth Amendment.  The suit alleged unreasonable search of his car and unreasonable seizure of his firearms—in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The lawsuit raised important issues because Steve Sanson had a concealed weapons permit when his firearms were seized.  At all times during the incident with Metro, Sanson faithfully adhered to concealed carry rules.

Sanson’s suit further alleged that LVMPD fails to professionally train Metro Police Officers on the Fourth Amendment—which, of course, governs police conduct during traffic stops, vehicular searches, and firearms seizures.

Notably, Steve Sanson’s lawsuit was championed by an unparalleled trial attorney and celebrated legal scholar, the incomparable, Adam Breeden, Esq.!

Sanson’s lawsuit made compelling arguments, for example, LVMPD’s training handbook never mentions the Supreme Court case, Arizona v. Gant, [556 U.S. 332 (2009)].  Arizona vs. Gant governs warrantless vehicular searches incident to arrest—and yet it’s NOT mentioned in LVMPD’s training manual.  (Are you effin kidding me?)  This factoid tends to suggest that Metro Officers are not properly hatted on the Fourth Amendment.

According to Arizona vs. Gant, in order to have lawfully arrested Sanson, the Fourth Amendment requires that Officer Pinal demonstrate: (i) a threat to his safety posed by Sanson, or, (ii) a need to preserve evidence and prevent evidence tampering by Sanson.  However, the videotape clearly reveals that LVMPD could not make these threshold showings and one must presume this is why LVMPD graciously agreed to concede the match and settle-up.

AFTERMATH

As a result of the lawsuit, LVMPD has honorably agreed to provide remedial constitutional training for the arresting officer.  And this is terrific news!  It shows that LVMPD is sincere!  But wait a sec!  Stop right there!  Can we get some remedial constitutional training for, Family Court Judge’s Harter and Ochoa?  Srsly!

If they can provide constitutional training for police officers, then we need mandatory enrollment for all family court judges!  Why? —because the family court has become a “Constitution-free” zone!    Hopefully, the newly elected judges will change that.

We are also proud to announce that the Sanson incident will be featured in Concealed Carry Magazine!  And, the videotape of the incident will be used nationwide in CCW training. “OO-rah!”

And stay tuned, because the Citizen Review Board will soon render their take on the matter—which has been duly submitted and now awaits the Board’s consideration.

Finally, it is our intention to respectful to Officer Pinal and the good men and women at LVMPD.  Moving forward, we wish Officer Pinal and his family all the best—and we are incredibly pleased that Metro will henceforth include in its training manual the landmark decision, Arizona vs. Gant, which benefits everybody!

Indeed!  This is truly a win-win situation!  Outstanding!

 

VETERANS In POLITICS INTERNATIONAL (“Where Change Happens”)

 

Read More –>

Veterans In Politics Argues Against Nevada Assembly Bill 115

Veterans In Politics Argues Against Nevada Assembly Bill 115

 

Clark County Nevada

March 2, 2021

 

Veterans In Politics video internet talk-show interviewed Burke Hall a litigant that has been fighting to have custody of his two remaining sons after his ex-wife was convicted of the death of their youngest son.  Burke discusses why AB 115 is not a law that would benefit Nevada’s families in this year’s legislative session.

Please click on the link below to view AB115:

legiscan.com/NV/bill/AB115/2021

 

Summary

AN ACT relating to parentage; authorizing a court to determine in certain circumstances that more than two people have a parent and child relationship with a child; establishing provisions concerning custody and visitation, adoption, and the termination of parental rights in cases in which a child has more than two parents; requiring the Committee to Review Child Support Guidelines to review the guidelines established by regulation for the support of one or more children to determine the amount of required support in cases in which a child has more than two parents and provide any recommendations for revisions to the Administrator of the Division of Welfare and Supportive Services of the Department of Health and Human Services; requiring the Administrator to review and consider any such recommendations and revise or adopt any necessary regulations, and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

 

Our Argument Against this bill:

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 115

 

  1. TOTAL WASTE OF LEGISLATION RESOURCES. THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER IMPORTANT BILLS TO ADDRESS. THIS IS A DIRECT VIOLATION AND MOCKERY OF OUR US CONSTITUTION.
  2. SEVERE VIOLATION OF NRS 126.036 TROXEL V. GRANVILLE
  3. WE ALREADY HAVE SURROGACY LAWS AND SPERM DONATION CONTRACT LAWS.
  4. AND GAY MARRIAGE ALREADY ALLOWS SAME-SEX COUPLES TO BE PARENTS.
  5. THERE IS NO REASON FOR EVEN MORE DISCRETION.
  6. THIS BILL WOULD UNDERMINE THE ENTIRE INSTITUTION OF THE FAMILY UNIT. AND GIVE FAMILY COURT JUDGES UNLIMITED POWER AND DISCRETION OVER THE BIOLOGICAL PARENTS REGARDLESS IF THEY ARE FIT; REGARDLESS IF THEY ARE MARRIED
  7. WE ALREADY SUFFER FROM JUDGES HAVING “TOO MUCH” DISCRETION AND THIS WOULD GIVE CARTE BLANCHE TO DESTROY THE FAMILY UNIT AND ALLOW LEGALIZED TORTUROUS INTERFERENCE IN PARENTING RIGHTS. ESSENTIALLY IT WOULD ALLOW LEGALIZED KIDNAPPING—GIVE THEM THE DISCRETION TO ASSIGN OR REMOVE PARENTS.
  8. JUST LIKE IN THE DOCUMENTARY “THE GUARDIANS”, A STATE OFFICIAL SHOWS UP AT YOUR FRONT DOOR——MRS. _____________, I HAVE A TEMPORARY ORDER TO TAKE YOUR CHILD. COMPLY OR FACE JAIL TIME.
  9. CREATES SIBLING ALIENATION AS YOUR CHILDREN COULD EACH HAVE DIFFERENT PARENTS EVEN IF THEY ARE 100% BIOLOGICALLY RELATED.
  10. IN THE RASMUSSEN-HAMMER CASE THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR 8 YEARS WE SEE THE SEVERE DAMAGE CAUSED TO THE CHILD WHEN DISTRICT COURT JUDGES USED THEIR DISCRETION TO GIVE A MARRIED WOMAN PARENTING RIGHTS TO A 6 ½ YRS OLD GIRL ALONG WITH THE BIOLOGICAL PARENTS ON THE PREMISE SHE WAS A “BABYSITTER”. HOW THIS IS GOING ON UNDER EXISTING LAW IS A MYSTERY. THE COURT TREATS THE 100% BIOLOGICALLY RELATED SIBLINGS AS IF THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PARENTS AND AS SUCH SIBLING BOND DOES NOT EXIST. THE BROTHER AND SISTER HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED CONTACT IN OVER 2 YEARS. BOTH GRIEVE THE LOSS OF ONE ANOTHER.
  11. THIS JUDICIAL DISCRETION WOULD ALSO DESTROY BEST INTEREST UNDER NRS 125C.0035.
  12. AMERICA HAS THE LOWEST CHILDBIRTH IN 38 YEARS. IF PARENTS FEEL THEY HAVE NO POWER TO GOVERN THEIR FAMILIES, THEY WILL HAVE FEWER CHILDREN.
  13. A JUDICIAL CRISIS ALREADY EXISTS, JUDGES ALREADY ABUSING DISCRETION, THIS WOULD MAKE IT 10X WORSE. THIS BILL WILL FEED THE FIRE OF JUDICIAL ERROR OR JUDICIAL CORRUPTION.
  14. WOULD CLOG UP CHILD SUPPORT COURTS AS NOW THERE ARE MORE PARENTS FROM WHICH TO COLLECT.
  15. IT MIGHT BE A WAY TO DRUM UP MORE $$$$ THROUGH FAMILY COURT. THE CONTENTION IS ALREADY AT A HIGH WITH TWO PARENTS. MORE THAN TWO WOULD CREATE BIGGER WARS AND PUT EVEN MORE PRESSURE ON CHILDREN.; FORCING THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THREE, FOUR, OR MORE ADULTS.
  16. IN ADDITION, IT ALLOWS THE GOVERNMENT TO INTERCEDE.
  17. YOU MIGHT BE FORCED TO SHARE YOUR CHILD WITH A STATE AGENCY WHERE THE STATE AGENCY IS DEEMED TO BE GIVEN THE PARENT STATUS.
  18. ANYONE COULD NOW FILE A PETITION FOR PARENTAGE; NEIGHBOR, FRIEND, SCHOOL TEACHER, BABYSITTER, ANYONE WHO HAS A “RELATIONSHIP” WITH YOUR CHILD.

 

Please click on the link below to view: Burke Hall discusses proposed legislation regarding family court on Veterans In Politics talk-show

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUIs14J-6Kw&t=534s

 

 

 

Educate yourself!

 

 

Read More –>

The Rush to Divorce Mediation in the Time of COVID-19

The Rush to Divorce Mediation in the Time of COVID-19

Mediation might not be optimal for those whose spouse suffers from narcissism, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, or other mental health issues.

Read More –>

Supreme Court candidate firm on citizen’s constitutional rights and Trustee Candidate will surrender salary to teacher’s classroom on VIP Talk Show!

Supreme Court candidate firm on citizen’s constitutional rights and Trustee Candidate will surrender salary to teacher’s classroom on VIP Talk Show!

“Government has no authority to take away what it didn’t give in the first place”!

Erv Nelson

Erv Nelson candidate for Nevada’s Supreme Court Seat D

Click onto the link to view the website: ballotpedia.org/Erv_Nelson

Click onto the link for the Veterans In Politics video internet talk-show:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx11p80BRD4&feature=youtu.be

 

Katie Williams candidate for Clark County School Board Trustee District B

Click onto the link to view the website:  www.katiewilliamsnv.com/

Click onto the link to view the Veterans In Politics video internet talk-show:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAMi44KW5RE&feature=youtu.be

 

 

Endorsed Family Court Candidate

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT I
CHEVALIER, YVETTE Endorsement

  

Recommendation for Family Court Candidates

 DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT A
VOY, WILLIAM OAKS Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT J
MACDONALD, JOHN SCOTT Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT M
HUGHES, LYNN NEVILLE Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT P
PAGE, FRED C Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT S
SZYC, LISA MARIE Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT T
CUTTER, NADIN J Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT U
THRONE, DAWN RENEE Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT V
FLEEMAN, JACK WESLEY Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT Y
CHARTER, STEPHANIE ANNE Recommendation

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT Z
PEREZ, ROMEO RUIZ Recommendation

Read More –>

LIVE Square table Primary Election discussion on the Nevada Supreme Court & the Civil/Criminal Court Judicial Candidates

Clark County Nevada
May 5, 2020
The Veterans In Politics International Inc. will hold a “Live Streamed” square table
discussion on all the Judicial Candidates on the Primary election ballot for Nevada Supreme
Court and the Civil/Criminal Bench.
Monday, May 11th at 7 PM until.
Again LIVE STREAMED on Facebook Page: Steve Sanson click onto the link www.facebook.com/steve.sanson.3
At the end of each department, we will provide our recommendations.
We will discuss all the candidates below:
Nevada Supreme Court, Seat B
Pickering Mary Kristina Pickering, Kristina
Christensen Thomas Frank TF Christensen
Rodriguez Esther Christine Rodriguez, Esther C.
Nevada Supreme Court, Seat D
Fumo Osvaldo Fumo. Osvaldo
Herndon Douglas W. Herndon, Douglas
Nelson Erven Tebbs Nelson, Erv
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 2
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

KIERNY, CARLI LYNN

Ballot Name:
Kierny, Carli Lynn

NONPARTISAN
C/O LETIZIA AGENCY 410 SOUTH RAMPART STE. 390
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 546-8775 (PHONE)
CARLI@CARLI4JUDGE.COM
WWW.CARLI4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

MARCELLO, DUSTIN R

Ballot Name:
Marcello, Dustin R.

NONPARTISAN
601 LAS VEGAS BLVD. SOUTH
LAS VEGAS NV 89101
(702) 546-6256 (PHONE)
(702) 474-4210 (FAX)
DUSTIN@DUSTINMARCELLO.COM
WWW.DUSTINMARCELLO.COM
01/06/2020

SCHIFALACQUA, BARBARA FLORENCE

CANDIDATE WITHDREW

NONPARTISAN
2520 SAINT ROSE PARKWAY, STE 112
HENDERSON NV 89074
(702) 236-1106 (PHONE)
BARBARA@BARBARASCHIFALACQUA.COM
WWW.BARBARASCHIFALACQUA.COM
01/07/2020

SCOTTI, RICHARD FRANK

Ballot Name:
Scotti, Richard

NONPARTISAN
REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER DEPT 2 200 LEWIS AVE
LAS VEGAS NV 89155
(702) 232-0170 (PHONE)
REELECTJUDGESCOTTI@GMAIL.COM
01/08/2020
Total: 4
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 3
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

GANZ, SR., ADAM

Ballot Name:
Ganz, Adam

NONPARTISAN
8950 W TROPICANA #1
LAS VEGAS NV 89147
(702) 546-9141 (PHONE)
GANZ4JUDGE2020@GMAIL.COM
WWW.GANZ4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

MICELI, MICHAEL JUSTIN

Ballot Name:
Miceli, Michael J.

NONPARTISAN
601 LAS VEGAS BLVD., SOUTH
LAS VEGAS NV 89101
(702) 860-7394 (PHONE)
(702) 474-4210 (FAX)
MIKEMICELI4JUDGE@GMAIL.COM
WWW.MIKEMICELI4JUDGE.COM
01/17/2020

TRUJILLO, MONICA

Ballot Name:
Trujillo, Monica

NONPARTISAN
C/O LETIZIA AGENCY 410 S. RAMPART BLVD. STE. 390
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 530-8605 (PHONE)
MONICA@TRUJILLO4JUDGE.COM
WWW.TRUJILLO4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020
Total: 3
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 4
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

AURBACH, PHILLIP SANDFORD

Ballot Name:
Aurbach, Phil

NONPARTISAN
10001 PARK RUN DR
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 942-2155 (PHONE)
PAURBACH@GMAIL.COM
WWW.PHILAURBACHFORJUDGE.COM
01/15/2020

FRIEDBERG, CRAIG BENNETT

CANDIDATE WITHDREW

NONPARTISAN
4760 S. PECOS RD., SUITE 103
LAS VEGAS NV 89121
(702) 530-8740 (PHONE)
FRIEDBERGFORJUDGE@GMAIL.COM
WWW.FRIEDBERGFORJUDGE.COM
01/13/2020

KRALL, NADIA

Ballot Name:
Krall, Nadia

NONPARTISAN
9811 W CHARLESTON BLVD 2-634
LAS VEGAS NV 89117
(702) 385-1600 (PHONE)
NADIA@NADIAFORJUDGE.COM
01/09/2020

MOREO, KERRY L

CANDIDATE WITHDREW

NONPARTISAN
410 S RAMPART BLVD. STE.390
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 524-1224 (PHONE)
VOTEEARLEYNV@GMAIL.COM
WWW.JUDGEKERRYEARLEY.COM
01/06/2020

SCHIFALACQUA, BARBARA FLORENCE

Ballot Name:
Schifalacqua, Barbara

NONPARTISAN
2520 SAINT ROSE PARKWAY, STE 112
HENDERSON NV 89074
(702) 236-1106 (PHONE)
BARBARA@BARBARASCHIFALACQUA.COM
WWW.BARBARASCHIFALACQUA.COM
01/13/2020
Total: 5
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 5
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

ABBOTT, ERIC LAURENCE

Ballot Name:
Abbott, Eric

NONPARTISAN
P.O. BOX 35156
LAS VEGAS NV 89133
(702) 720-9803 (PHONE)
EABBOTTFOR JUDGE@GMAIL.COM
WWW.ABBOTTFORJUDGE.COM
01/16/2020

BARISICH, VERONICA M

Ballot Name:
Barisich, Veronica

NONPARTISAN
2505 ANTHEM VILLAGE DR E 194
HENDERSON NV 89052
VERONICAFORJUDGE@OUTLOOK.COM
WWW.VERONICAFORJUDGE.COM
01/17/2020

COFFING, TERRY A

Ballot Name:
Coffing, Terry

NONPARTISAN
C/O LETIZIA AGENCY 410 S RAMPART BLVD, SUITE 390
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 942-2136 (PHONE)
TERRY@COFFING4JUDGE.COM
WWW.COFFING4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

PARKER, BLAIR COWAN

Ballot Name:
Parker, Blair C.

NONPARTISAN
375 E WARM SPRINGS ROAD SUITE 104
LAS VEGAS NV 89119
(702) 823-3500 (PHONE)
(702) 823-3400 (FAX)
PARKERBLAIR4JUDGE@GMAIL.COM
WWW.COHENJOHNSON.COM
01/17/2020
Total: 4
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 15
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

BREEDEN, ADAM J

Ballot Name:
Breeden, Adam

NONPARTISAN
376 E. WARM SPRINGS RD. #120
LAS VEGAS NV 89119
(702) 508-0052 (PHONE)
(702) 819-7771 (FAX)
ADAM@BREEDENANDASSOCIATES.COM
WWW.BREEDENANDASSOCIATES.COM
01/17/2020

HARDY, JR., JOSEPH PAUL

Ballot Name:
Hardy, Jr., Joe

NONPARTISAN
200 LEWIS AVENUE
LAS VEGAS NV 89101
(702) 339-6948 (PHONE)
JOE@JUDGEJOEHARDY.COM
WWW.JUDGEJOEHARDY.COM
01/06/2020

MACHNICH, TEGAN CHRISTINE

Ballot Name:
Machnich, Tegan Christine

NONPARTISAN
C/O DAWSON & LORDAHL PLLC 8925 WEST POST ROAD STE. 210
LAS VEGAS NV 89148
(847) 644-4155 (PHONE)
TEGANCHRISTINE4JUDGELV@GMAIL.COM
WWW.TEGANCHRISTINE4JUDGELV.COM
01/17/2020
Total: 3
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 19
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

ELLER, CRYSTAL LYN

Ballot Name:
Eller, Crystal

NONPARTISAN
104 SOUTH JONES BLVD
LAS VEGAS NV 89107
(702) 685-6655 (PHONE)
(702) 804-5090 (FAX)
CRYSTAL@CRYSTAL4JUDGE.COM
WWW.CRYSTAL4JUDGE.COM
01/17/2020

KEPHART, WILLIAM DAVID

Ballot Name:
Kephart, William “Bill”

NONPARTISAN
7435 S EASTERN AVENUE SUITE 105 BOX 420
LAS VEGAS NV 89123
(702) 281-8949 (PHONE)
KEPHART2020ELECTION@GMAIL.COM
01/06/2020

MILLER, FIKISHA LIKI

Ballot Name:
Miller, Fikisha Liki

NONPARTISAN
438 E. SAHARA AVE
LAS VEGAS NV 89104
(702) 994-4912 (PHONE)
INFO@ITISTIMEFORMILLER.COM
WWW.ITISTIMEFORMILLER.COM
01/09/2020
Total: 3
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 21
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

ALMASE, CAESAR VICENTE

Ballot Name:
Almase, Caesar

NONPARTISAN
526 S 7TH STREET
LAS VEGAS NV 89101
(702) 326-3814 (PHONE)
(702) 463-8595 (FAX)
CAESAR@CAESARALMASE4JUDGE.COM
WWW.CAESARALMASE4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

CLARK NEWBERRY, TARA DEE

Ballot Name:
Clark Newberry, Tara

NONPARTISAN
438 E. SAHARA AVE.
LAS VEGAS NV 89104
(702) 751-2171 (PHONE)
TARA@CLARKNEWBERRYFORJUDGE.COM
WWW.CLARKNEWBERRYFORJUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

GALE, BRUCE L

Ballot Name:
Gale, Bruce L.

NONPARTISAN
830 LAS VEGAS BOULEVARD SOUTH
LAS VEGAS NV 89101
(702) 526-2161 (PHONE)
ATTYBRUCELGALE@AOL.COM
01/17/2020

REYNOLDS, JACOB ALVIN

Ballot Name:
Reynolds, Jacob

NONPARTISAN
10080 W. ALTA DR. SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 381-3323 (PHONE)
(702) 385-2086 (FAX)
JACOB@JACOB4JUDGE.COM
WWW.JACOB4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020
Total: 4
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 23
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

ARMSTRONG, KARL WESLEY

Ballot Name:
Armstrong, Karl W.

NONPARTISAN
3753 HOWARD HUGHES PKWY #200
LAS VEGAS NV 89169
(702) 245-7652 (PHONE)
KARLATTORNEY1@GMAIL.COM
WWW.ARMSTRONG4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

FRIEDBERG, CRAIG BENNETT

Ballot Name:
Friedberg, Craig

NONPARTISAN
4760 S. PECOS RD., SUITE 103
LAS VEGAS NV 89121
(702) 530-8740 (PHONE)
FRIEDBERGFORJUDGE@GMAIL.COM
WWW.FRIEDBERGFORJUDGE.COM
01/17/2020

LILLY-SPELLS, JASMIN D

Ballot Name:
Lilly-Spells, Jasmin

NONPARTISAN
438 E SAHARA AVENUE
LAS VEGAS NV 89104
(702) 907-5565 (PHONE)
JASMIN@LILLY-SPELLS.COM
WWW.LILLY-SPELLS.COM
01/06/2020

SWEETIN, JAMES ROBERT

Ballot Name:
Sweetin, Jim

NONPARTISAN
7995 BLUE DIAMOND ROAD STE. 102- #184
LAS VEGAS NV 89178
(702) 656-2015 (PHONE)
JIM@JIMSWEETIN.COM
WWW.JIMSWEETIN.COM
01/06/2020
Total: 4
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 24
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

BALLOU, ERIKA DANIELLE

Ballot Name:
Ballou, Erika D.

NONPARTISAN

(702) 405-7373 (PHONE)
ERIKA4JUDGE@GMAIL.COM

01/17/2020

BOHN, MICHAEL F

Ballot Name:
Bohn, Mickey

NONPARTISAN
C/OF LETIZIA AGENCY 410 S RAMPART #390
LAS VEGAS NV 89145
(702) 642-3113 (PHONE)
(702) 642-9766 (FAX)
MICKEY@BOHN4JUDGE.COM
WWW.BOHN4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

GILLIAM, DANIEL ROBERT

Ballot Name:
Gilliam, Dan

NONPARTISAN
2340 W. HORIZON RIDGE PKWY SUITE 100
HENDERSON NV 89052
702-378-2442 (PHONE)
DAN@GILLIAM4JUDGE.COM
WWW.GILLIAM4JUDGE.COM
01/06/2020

RINETTI, DENA IRENE

Ballot Name:
Rinetti, Dena

NONPARTISAN
2520 SAINT ROSE PKWY STE. 112
HENDERSON NV 89074
(702) 998-2693 (PHONE)
DENA@DENARINETTI.COM
WWW.DENARINETTI.COM
01/06/2020

VADALA, JOSEPH

Ballot Name:
Vadala, Joe

NONPARTISAN
438 E SAHARA AVENUE
LAS VEGAS NV 89104
(702) 338-7969 (PHONE)
JOE@VOTEVADALA.COM
WWW.VOTEVADALA.COM
01/17/2020
Total: 5
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 28
(6-YEAR TERM)
Candidate
Party
Contact Information
Date Filed

CAVANAUGH, JAMES EARLY

Ballot Name:
Cavanaugh, James E. “Jim”

NONPARTISAN
8605 LINDERWOOD DR
LAS VEGAS NV 89134
(702) 493-6989 (PHONE)
(702) 255-2858 (FAX)
JIM.CAVANAUGH@OUTLOOK.COM
WWW.JIMCAVANAUGH4JUDGE.COM
01/15/2020

ISRAEL, RONALD J

Ballot Name:
Israel, Ron

NONPARTISAN
9360 W FLAMINGO STE. 110-450
LAS VEGAS NV 89147
JUDGERONISRAEL@GMAIL.COM
WWW.JUDGERONISRAEL.COM
01/06/2020

MCLEOD, ALEXANDRA BETH

Ballot Name:
Mcleod, Alexandra Beth

NONPARTISAN
438 E. SAHARA AVE
LAS VEGAS NV 89104
(702) 751-1450 (PHONE)
ALEXANDRA@MCLEODFORJUDGE.COM
WWW.MCLEODFORJUDGE.COM
01/17/2020
Total: 3
LIVE Square table Primary Election discussion on the Clark County Family Court Judicial Candidates – Veterans In Politics International
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT A
VOY, WILLIAM OAKS Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT I
CHEVALIER, YVETTE Endorsement
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT J
MACDONALD, JOHN SCOTT Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT M
HUGHES, LYNN NEVILLE Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT P
PAGE, FRED C Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT S
SZYC, LISA MARIE Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT T
CUTTER, NADIN J Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT U
THRONE, DAWN RENEE Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT V
FLEEMAN, JACK WESLEY Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT Y
CHARTER, STEPHANIE ANNE Recommendation
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT Z
PEREZ, ROMEO RUIZ Recommendation

Read More –>