wrongful death in nevada

Wrongful Death Lawsuits in Las Vegas, Nevada

The impact of having a loved one die before their time is devastating. The knowledge that their death occurred because of someone’s negligence makes it even more difficult to deal with the unexpected tragedy. States differ in how residents can make a wrongful death claim and what dictates when someone else was negligently responsible. In Nevada, anyone who feels that they have a valid claim should contact a personal injury attorney to learn their options for getting compensation.

The Free Dictionary defines wrongful death as the taking of a life due to another person’s willful or negligent act by one or more persons. When a person’s death occurs under these circumstances, the beneficiaries who relied on the victim’s income to support them can file a claim to get compensation. The limits of compensation and the determination of who is allowed to file a claim are determined by the state.

When someone is charged with the crime of murder and found innocent, it does not mean that they cannot be found guilty of wrongful death. As mentioned in an article in the LA Times, there are numerous celebrity cases where the individual has been found innocent of criminal charges only to be found liable for a person’s death in a civil case. One of the most familiar stories is that of O.J. Simpson in connection with the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman.

The Goal of Most Wrongful Death Lawsuits

Although many families would prefer to get just for their loved ones through criminal charges when the situation calls for it, the goal of most wrongful death lawsuits is to get compensation that is fair and just. The claim must be filed in court by a person who is allowed by the state of Nevada to legally represent the victim. Different circumstances can result in a person’s death. Those that are most common are:

  • Car Accidents
  • Premises Liability (often called “slip and fall” or “trip and fall”)
  • Medical Malpractice
  • Negligence of Any Kind

Once the representative of the victim wins the lawsuit, the offender is required to pay compensation if they are found guilty. The three types of compensation that they can receive are economic compensation, non-economic compensation and punitive damage. Economic compensation refers to the money acquired for medical expenses that the victim incurred prior to their death. They can also go towards the burial and funeral costs, lost wages, and property damage.

Non-economic compensation is for the psychological impact of the death on the family. These include pain and suffering, depression and grief, and loss of companionship. Although most people understand that financial compensation will not reduce the emotional impact of the loss, economic compensation will help reduce the financial burden the death has had on the family. Punitive damages can also be used to punish the person for causing the injury.

A good personal injury lawyer in Las Vegas, NV can help you determine whether you have a valid wrongful death case and how you will need to go about pursuing it.

contesting a will

How to Contest a Will in Nevada

In the state of Nevada, a Last Will and Testament is presumed valid – even if it was written by the deceased person themselves on the back of a napkin just days before their passing. In fact, a valid holographic will only requires 3 things to be valid: that it be hand written, hand dated, and signed.

This, of course, leads to potential problems. What if the deceased didn’t have the mental capacity to make a will? What if he or she was coerced or influenced by somebody to the point that the will doesn’t actually represent their true desires?  That’s when the will must be contested.

woman writing a will

The challenge of contesting a will in Nevada

Proving any of those things will be a fight.

Contesting a will in Nevada is basically just another form of litigation. The contestant is in the role of the plaintiff, and the petitioner for the probate of the will is filling the role of the defendant. The regular rules of civil litigation also apply to will contests. Each party can gather information about the other side’s claims in the “discovery” process using the usual litigation tools of “interrogatories” and through depositions. There is going to be an evidentiary hearing, which is a lot like a trial.

The contestant has to make their case very well. As described above, the judge is going to have the default view that whatever will exists is valid. Therefore to prove the will is invalid, your case must prove one of the following:

  1. the will was not properly signed and witnessed,
  2. the testator lacked mental capacity, or
  3. there was coercion or undue influence by somebody and therefore the will is not representative of the testator’s true desire.

 

The process of contesting a will in Nevada

First, you must have “standing” to contest a will, meaning you have the legal right to bring your challenge to the court. Nevada has strong rules about who qualifies as an “interested person” in these cases and is therefore qualified as to their standing. Basically you have to have some kind of claim to the estate.

Once a will is contested, the probate court will probably appoint somebody to act as “Special Administrator” to administer the estate until the contest reaches resolution. The special administrator is not to distribute the estate until after the case resolves. The special administrator must be a Nevada resident, or a bank, or a trust company (or be associated with one of those as co-Administrator).

The litigation will proceed along established rules for Nevada. It is important to have an experienced Nevada probate law firm help you. Litigation is complex, and probate only makes it more complicated. A will being “unfair” is not good enough to get it thrown out. You will need a team to build your case and present your evidence in a way that the probate court will accept.

If you need to contest a will in Nevada, please call us today.

Power of Attorney For Mother

How Can I Get Power of Attorney For My Mother?

The question, “how can I get power of attorney” for a person is among the most frequent inquiries our estate planning department receives. Most people have a general idea of what a power of attorney is, however, relatively few understand how it is granted and when it can be granted. This article will discuss the two main types of power of attorney and what they cover, how someone can grant power of attorney to another person, and the importance of capacity during execution of the power of attorney.

What is Power of Attorney and What Authority Can it Grant?

Nevada law defines “Power of Attorney” as “a writing or other record that grants authority to acting the place of the principal.”[1] The principal is the “individual who grants authority to an agent in a power of attorney.”[2]

Nevada deals mainly with two types of power of attorney: Power of Attorney for Financial Matters and the Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care Decisions. Each power of attorney is important in its own sphere and a principal should ideally execute both.

The financial power of attorney allows the principal to appoint an agent to whom she can grant authority over several items including real property, personal property, bank accounts, and the personal maintenance of the principal. The principal can also elect whether to make the power of attorney effective immediately or upon the determination of doctor that the principal no longer has capacity.

The health care power of attorney allows the principal to appoint an agent she authorizes to make health care decisions on her behalf if she is otherwise unable to make those decisions herself. This power of attorney also allows the principal to declare her desires in regard to whether she wants life prolonging treatments commenced or continued.

Execution of Power of Attorney

Nevada law requires certain procedures to validly execute a power of attorney. The financial power of attorney and power of attorney for health care decisions both have their own set of requires for the actual execution of the power of attorney.

The financial power of attorney must be sign by the principal, or in the principal’s conscious presence by a person directed by the principal to sign the principal’s name. The signature is presumed to be valid if notarized.[3]

The health care power of attorney must be signed by the principal and the signature must either be notarized or witnessed by two adults who know the principal personally.[4] The witnesses also cannot be a health care provider or the appointed agent and the at least one witness must be a person who is not related to principal and has no interest in the principal’s estate.[5]

The Importance of Capacity

Besides proper execution, the statutes governing power of attorney also provide extra requirements for validity in certain situations to ensure that the principal is competent to execute the power of attorney. One of the most important aspects of establishing a power of attorney is that this is not an authority or position that a potential agent can actively seek out and obtain on their own; you cannot go and “get” power of attorney. Rather, this authority is granted to the agent by the principal of their own volition. A person lacking capacity cannot make this appointment.

Nevada law is careful to only allow competent persons with capacity to execute powers of attorney. The law is so concerned with a principal’s competency that it requires proof of competency in certain cases. The statutes for both the financial power of attorney and the health care power of attorney provide that, “if the principal resides in a hospital, residential facility for groups, facility for skilled nursing or home for individual residential care,” when the power of attorney is executed, the power of attorney must be accompanied by a certificate of competency from a physician, psychologist, or psychiatrist declaring that the principal has the requisite capacity to execute the power of attorney.[6]

The Importance of Power of Attorney

A valid power of attorney is a vital part of any person’s estate planning. Unlike other parts of an estate plan which contemplate what happens after a person dies, powers of attorney take into account a person’s needs during their lifetime. In many cases, a valid power of attorney can prevent the need for a court-appointed guardianship. The cost of having the power of attorney correctly executed is well worth any person’s time and can certainly simplify matters when caring for a loved one in need of assistance.

[1] NRS 162A.090.

[2] NRS 162A.110.

[3] NRS 162A.220(1).

[4] NRS 162A.790(2).

[5] NRS 162A.790(3)-(4).

[6] NRS 162A.220(2); NRS 162A.790(5).

common motorcycle injuries

Common Motorcycle Injuries

Anybody who rides knows that careless drivers can cause a crash in an instant. But what are the most common motorcycle injuries? Is a motorcycle crash always going to cause severe injuries, or is there hope for a less intense “ride?” Here are the most common types of motorcycle injuries.

Head Injuries

common biker injuriesThe sad truth is that head injuries are the most common motorcycle injury. This is because so many riders choose to go without a helmet. There is some good news, however, which is that the National Highway Safety Center for Statistics estimates that thousands of riders’ lives were saved thanks to wearing a helmet. Like most states, Nevada has a motorcycle helmet law which requires helmets to be worn not just by riders, but by all passengers on a motorcycle.

As a side-note: if you were in a motorcycle crash and didn’t have a helmet, it doesn’t automatically mean you’re responsible for any head injuries. Don’t trust anybody who says otherwise. Talk to one of our motorcycle injury lawyers for REAL legal advice on this important subject.

Road Rash

Spend any time with riders, either in person or online, and you’ll quickly hear about road rash. Everybody knows that head injuries are serious and could affect you for your entire life. However, most non-motorcycle riders don’t know that the same is true with road rash. It’s far more than just a little scrape.

Road rash can be severe enough to cause infection, nerve damage, and permanent scars across wide areas of the body. In extreme cases, sliding across the road during an accident can literally peel the skin off of an entire limb – a horrifying trauma called “degloving.”

Muscle Damage

Muscle damage ranks high on the list not only because of damage your soft tissues may incur during an accident, but because repetitive use of certain muscles can cause injury for those who ride frequently.

But during a motorcycle crash, your muscles are exposed to damage and injury. It can happen during the impact, if you fall a certain way, if you get pinned under something, or in any one of a thousand other ways.

In some cases, muscle damage can be treated by specialized doctors. Full use of the damaged tissues can be restored given enough time and treatment. However in many cases the damage can cause lifetime problems.

Biker’s Arm

Biker’s arm is the term used to describe what happens to the arm when it’s used to break a fall. You probably know what we’re talking about: You feel yourself falling or tipping over, and you very naturally want to break your fall by putting up your arms to protect your head.

During a motorcycle crash, motorcyclists will have that same instinct, even if there’s no way that your hands could possibly protect you. It’s just human instinct – built into us. So what happens? The rider finds himself flying through the air and raises his arms to protect himself from the impact. The end result is torn ligaments, broken bones, and damaged nerves.

Broken Legs

The legs of a motorcycle rider are exposed in ways that automobile drivers’ legs are not. This means damaged and broken legs happen far more often to riders during a motorcycle accident. A severe leg injury can snap bones which themselves cut into muscle, veins, and nerves. It is not uncommon for a rider with leg damage to be unable to ride ever again due to long-term complications related to a leg injury.

While protective gear may help mitigate some of the minor injuries legs commonly get – such as road rash – there’s really no good way to prevent legs from breaking. Don’t ever believe somebody who says it’s your own fault.

Your Injuries Are Not Your Fault.

When a crash occurs the insurance companies will try and get out of paying what they should by saying things like “you chose to ride a motorcycle – you assumed the higher risk.” or “You didn’t wear your protective gear that day.” or “you could have done something to make your injuries less.” This is nonsense. DO. NOT. LISTEN. TO. THEM.

You have the absolute right to safety and security on the roads. When another person violates those rights, it is NOT your fault that injuries occurred to you.

Our motorcycle crash lawyers will take a stand for your legal rights. Do not agree with the insurance companies. Do not say yes to them. You let us handle them and make it clear that they must keep their legal promises to you.

If you’ve been hurt in a motorcycle crash, call us NOW. (702)-522-0696

las vegas real estate

Las Vegas Finally Picks Up After 2008

Clear Counsel Law Group is pleased to feature this blog post by our friend Margaretha Breytenbach who has helped many of our clients make responsible real estate decisions.

The Great Recession of 2008 became known as the 2008 financial crisis and it made way for the most widespread disruption to the US economy ever since the Great Depression is the 30’s. It started in 2007 when the US real estate market began falling apart and delinquencies of mortgages increased. By September and October of 2008, it created a nationwide financial disaster. The US government provided extraordinary assistance to financial institutions by flooding the market with money, adding liquidity and increasing government spending.

When the leverage credit market seized up, and the US mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went flop during the summer, the government was distressed since these two are highly important in the US real estate market. Since the failure of those two institutions could cause the fall of the entire financial system, the US treasury injected $200Billion of funds as new capital in the form of stocks.

Jobs and Tourism

Las Vegas, being one of the most sought after tourist destinations in the US, became the epicenter of foreclosures. When there are only few people left spending their earnings in a casinos, hotels and bars, incomes get depleted, and mortgages go unpaid. The unemployment rate rose when business tried their best not to go underwater by cutting manpower. Many are yet to recover from it.

Many construction projects were put on hold when US citizens felt Vegas party trips were no longer a responsible use of income. Major constructions went bankrupt and halted their completion like the Summerlin shops and Cosmopolitan. Everyone in our tourism-driven community felt the pinch.

Why now is a Good Time to Invest in a Home?

Everyone almost gave up when we went so near rock bottom. Even the middle class has bankruptcy declarations; about 13,068 (individual and business) foreclosures were from the Clark County. It increased by 2010 to 25,000 but eventually recovered in the first quarters of 2015 to 4,566.

The market was slow in picking up the pieces left by this upheaval in the US housing bubble. However, the latest findings show that where it struck hardest, the recovery will also rise fastest. Las Vegas had made the largest jump in the number of renters to owners ratio from 39.5% (2006) to 49.4% (2014).

Home values are now recovering at a fast pace; more so due to the fact those tourists are again pouring back to the Strip. Businesses are booming. All temporized construction and plans are resumed. Las Vegas is reinvented and reinvigorated.

Born and Raised in South Africa, Margaretha has moved in the USA since 2004 after extensive travel through Europe. Well versed in the international market, she was also able to cater her Real Estate services to those from Canada, China and Europe. Whether you are looking to buy, sell, invest as a first time home buyer or a seasoned investor; it would be Margaretha’s honor to apply her strong negotiating skills to your transaction. She is motivated to build a strong business relationship with all her clients and can show you why she is the right person to market your home.“Top 100 Women in Real Estate in 2017” by MYVEGAS Magazine, Top 10 Real Estate Agents on Social Media by Property Sparks and currently the #1 Real Estate agent for 2018 with Urban Nest Realty.

Contact information:

Mobile: 702-813-1770

email: mbreytenbach@mac.com

photos after car accident

What to Photograph After an Auto Accident

In auto accident cases, seeing is definitely believing. Often, one picture can do more good or harm to a case than hours and hours of witness testimony. This is also true when negotiating with insurance adjusters. The more photographic evidence of car damage and bodily injury they receive, the more likely they are to offer higher amounts of money to settle your case. With the prevalence of smart phones and camera phones, there is no excuse for not taking photographs to document your auto accident. If you are ever in an accident, you should immediately take photographs of three things.

Photograph the Car That Hit You.

First, you should take photographs of the car that hit you. This should always be done FIRST because you never know how long the other driver will remain at the scene. It might feel a little awkward taking photographs of someone else’s car, but it is very important. If the other driver protests, tell him or her that your insurance company has instructed you to take pictures of the scene. Often, this will be your only chance to document the damage to the other car. The other driver’s insurance will not allow you or your attorney to view any of its own photos until after a lawsuit is filed. This is because in a rear-end accident, the front of the rear car almost always shows more damage than the rear of the front car. The front of a car has more things that can be broken (grill, lights, etc.) than the back of a car, which is usually just a solid plastic bumper. In addition, when the other driver’s insurance company does take pictures of the damage, they will usually have the car cleaned to remove any dirt streaks that may make the damage look worse. They will also take pictures from angles that minimize how bad the damage looks. Thus, you must protect your case by immediately taking pictures of the other driver’s car.

Photograph The Damage to Your Car.

Second, you should take pictures of the damage to your car. If possible (and not dangerous), do this at the scene. When you take the photos at the scene, this removes any argument from the other driver’s insurance company that you may have tampered with your car before taking the photos. The other driver’s insurance company will eventually schedule an “estimate”. This is their opportunity to assess the damage to your car before offering to make any repairs. At the time of the estimate, the representative for the other insurance
company will take multiple pictures. Again, these pictures will be taken from angles that minimize the damage that is shown. In fact, some estimators have been known to carry towels and other cleaning supplies with them so they can try to buff out as many scratches and streaks as possible before taking photos. If you have taken photos of your car at the scene, these photos will help show a jury that the insurance company is trying to trick them into believing there was less damage to your car than there actually was. Your photos will have more credibility because they were taken much more closely in time to the accident than whatever photos the other driver’s insurance company may take.

Take Photos of Your Injuries

Third, you should take photos of any injuries to your body. Visual representations of injuries are much more powerful than simple descriptions. If you notice any bruising or scratches caused by your accident, you should photograph them immediately. Often when we are negotiating with insurance adjusters we will push them to their highest offer and then send them a client’s injury photographs. This automatically triggers an increase in the amount of money (called “reserves” or “authority”) that the adjuster can offer. The insurance company never wants a jury to see injury photos because they prove that the impact of the accident was definitely strong enough to cause injury.

If you are ever in an auto accident, make the simple effort to photograph these three things as soon as possible. Doing so will often increase the amount of money you are awarded at the end of your case.

cost of estate plans

How Much Do Estate Plans Cost in Nevada?

Estate Plan costs vary depending on who does the work. A do-it-yourself solution may be quite cheap, but could easily be full of holes. For a good estate plan, you should use an estate planning attorney who has the experience to give you what you need, without the holes.

  • Basic Estate Planning Forms: $300 – $500
  • A Paralegal Prepared “Estate Plan” $500 – $800
  • An Attorney Prepared Estate Plan $1500 – $2000
  • A Complex Estate Plan by an Attorney $3000+

 

Transcript:

Hi, my name is Jordan Flake. I’m an estate planning attorney with Clear Counsel Law Group. One question that we get all the time – and it’s a very legitimate question.

In fact, nearly every client asks this, and they should ask this … Is, “What’s your fee for preparing an estate plan?”

Now, for the purpose of estate plan, I’m going to use the idea of a living trust because that’s what many people end up needing if you have the standard range of assets, where you own a house and a few bank accounts and maybe retirement accounts like insurance policies, things like that.

A lot of people will fall into the category of wanting a basic revocable living trust package which includes the trust, the will, power of attorney documents and possibly a deed transferring a house to the trust, so it’s kind of your basic estate planning package that you would get.

When we talk about preparing this, the costs on the marketplace can range from maybe six or seven hundred dollars on the low end to thirty-five hundred dollars plus on the high end for this basic living trust package.

I just want to talk a little bit about why is there this big difference in cost and how can you as a potential consumer be savvy about the differences between a lower cost estate plan package and a higher cost estate plan package.

I Understand Your Perspective; Lawyers are Also Consumers

Let me first tell you that attorneys are consumers too. We go out in the world and we have to purchase things and I can tell you that when my car breaks down or if I ever have a mechanical issue, I’m not inclined, I’m not the kind of guy who can just pop open the trunk when the smoke is pouring out and then take the wrench and impress my wife by how quickly I get it all taken care of. That’s not me. I have to take the car in and I have this kind of paranoia inducing moment where I’m talking to this mechanic and he or she seems like a really good person who’s not going to overcharge me but I’m not really sure.

I feel pretty vulnerable in that situation because really I don’t know if this fix is something that could be done for a hundred dollars or if the fix should be costing a thousand dollars and I’m worried because I don’t have that knowledge and I feel pretty vulnerable.

I take that experience and I say, “Every day clients are going to come to me and they’re going to feel some of that same vulnerability. They’re not going to know whether or not the knowledge and skill set that I possess is worth several hundred dollars or thirty-five hundred plus dollars,” so our goal at Clear Counsel Law Group is to provide you with complete transparency with respect to what the services are, what they’re going to cost and very importantly what similar services are going to cost on the open marketplace.

Why There is a Range of Cost for an Estate Plan

Let’s just take this basic estate planning package for example and you can get this basic estate planning package, you can find it out there for four, five, six, seven hundred dollars. You can find all those documents. You can also pay upwards of thirty-five hundred dollars for all those same documents.

There’s a lot of room in between, but most law firms are going to charge somewhere in the fifteen hundred to twenty-five hundred dollars to prepare all these documents. Why is there so much variance? That can be attributable to the fact that on the lower end, some of these documents are being offered by paralegal services.

This kind of frustrates me as an attorney because that paralegal, I’m not so concerned that they’re undercutting the marketplace. I’m not one to care if the marketplace gives you good product for less money. I say, “Great. If that’s the place the market is headed, so be it.”

I’m not going to try to change that.

I’m going to try to beat it in fact.

The reality is, is that a paralegal doesn’t have the license to practice law and so yes, it might be a little big less expensive to hire a paralegal but there’s no governing body like the state bar that’s holding that paralegal strictly accountable for being competent and for being ethical and for managing client’s money in the proper way.

Really that paralegal shouldn’t be practicing any type of law in the first place. They should get shut down for the unauthorized practice of law.

What do estate plans cost?

Why a Licensed Attorney Should Draft Your Estate Plan

In contrast, as attorneys, the state bar is there to watch over us and make sure that we’re always competent and always ethical and if you as the client have any type of issues with any of the attorneys then you can actually go to the state bar.

Furthermore, a paralegal is not going to get malpractice insurance. They’re not going to be qualified to have an insurance company come along and insure their practice of law because they’re not licensed to practice law.

As an attorney, if we happen to make a mistake, any attorney, they’ll have malpractice insurance in place to make sure that you don’t have to pay for their mistake.

The attorney can pay for the mistake, not you. That’s not something you get with a paralegal.

When you do pay a little bit more money for an attorney to prepare these documents as opposed to a paralegal, understand that what you’re getting is you’re getting the guarantee of having malpractice insurance in place.

You’re getting the oversight provided by the state bar and then I’d say the very most important thing that you’re getting is the experience and the knowledge to make sure that it’s being done properly.

Don’t Worry If Your Estate Plan Was Not Drafted by a Lawyer, I Can Fix It.

I see this all the time. I have individuals who come in and they say, “I don’t think that the person who prepared this document was even an attorney.”

They’ll bring me a trust, this basic trust package that I’m talking about and they say, “Yeah, a financial advisor or a paralegal prepared this for me.” I’ll look through there and invariably I’ll find something that just required a little bit of experience, a little bit of nuance and a little bit of our knowledge but they totally missed it in the underlying documents and it had the potential to cause them huge problems.

I’m going to give you a quick example.

I had a woman in here who has a child who has special needs. That child is currently receiving governmental assistance.

The trust that was prepared by the paralegal would have just given an outright distribution to this child who had special needs upon the passing of the client. If she passed away and an outright distribution went to this child, that child would have lost their government assistance and would have after a few years just been totally destitute.

That paralegal or that financial advisor didn’t have the legal background that allowed them to say, “Aha. That child has special needs. That child needs what’s called a special needs trust where we can control that money in a way that won’t affect their ability to receive governmental assistance.”

Proper Estate Planning Should Not Be Done With a Form

It’s just little things like that. It’s the nuances. Think about how important your family is to you and how important your assets are to you and then just think are you going to entrust that to an individual who doesn’t have a license to practice law.

If you’re being really honest with yourself I think you’re going to say, “No. I don’t want to take any risks with this. It’s too important. It involves my loved ones, involves my hard-earned assets to which I gave my life taking care of my profession and my savings to make this happen.”

You don’t want to entrust that to somebody who doesn’t have the skills necessary to make sure it’s done properly.

That’s the lower end of the spectrum. On the higher end of the spectrum, I have a very high opinion of the attorneys here in Nevada. I feel like most of the attorneys that I know are going to give you a fair shake. They’re going to try to be forthright and honest with you.

I do think that there are some outliers on this end of the spectrum who may be somewhat relying on your lack of knowledge and experience, to charge you more for services that another attorney would charge you much less to provide the same services. I am concerned about that. I don’t think that as an attorney I have the right to use your lack of knowledge unfairly to my economic advantage.

Obviously, to some extent I do have the knowledge and I should be compensated for that so that question of where does it become unfair is the real issue. That’s where you’re going to see most attorneys clumped into this same area where we’re within five to eight hundred dollars of each other.

These outliers where it’s way lower, that should raise a concern or these other outliers where it’s a lot more expensive, that should raise some concerns too.

In any event, our goal at Clear Counsel Law Group is to provide complete transparency for why we’re charging what we’re charging. Our goal and ninety-nine percent of the time we’re able to achieve this, is after the initial consultation we will tell you exactly what you’re going to pay.

It will be a flat fee and it will be all-inclusive of everything that you have asked us to perform. There won’t be any doubt as to whether or not you get slapped with additional fees or charges at the end of the day.

There won’t be any concern that if I take a two hour nap and I dream about my client, that I hit him with a seven hundred dollar bill because, “Well, I technically was working on your case, Mrs. Jones.” Nothing like that.

That’s where we call ourselves Clear Counsel Law Group because we prize that kind of transparency with our clientele to where you have the peace of mind that you know exactly what you’re paying for, you know exactly how it compares to the rest of the marketplace and you can rest assured that we will provide the services that we said we’d provide at the cost and with the fees that we agreed to.

Please feel free to give us a call. There is no charge for the consultation. That’s when we come in and talk about the different options. Once you select an option, then we talk about the cost for providing that service.

Then we provide the service and you pay that amount and what we hope we get out of that transaction is a life-long client.

We want it to be a super-positive experience for you and for us so that you can come back to us in the future with any other legal needs or questions.

Feel free to give me a call. We’ll meet for a consultation and then we’ll discuss the options.

Thank you so much.

ClearCast #16: Why Did Clark County File Suit Against an Environmental Group?

[Editor’s note]

Welcome to Episode 16! Oh, do we have some fun coming!

But let’s not for one moment discount this fantastic conversation that we are proud to publish today!

If you are unfamiliar with the Save Red Rock organization, this column from Steve Sebelius will get you all caught up about who the major players are.

I want to personally thank Mr. Jones for taking time out of his busy day last Friday to explain to us his perspective as to why Clark County is suing his environmental group. This was above and beyond what I hoped for!

If Mr. Sisolak is serious about running for governor as a democrat in this state, he’s going to need to explain why the county brought the suit against Save Red Rock.

I have a hard time believing any of the folks marching downtown over the weekend approve of their municipality suing an environmental group to silence it, let alone the people that just reelected him.

I have spoken with Dan Kulin of Clark County and asked him to comment on the anti-SLAPP element of the discussion. He said he would respond in the coming days. I will publish the response when/if he does.

You will see also that Mr. Jones explains why he doesn’t trust this specific developer based on their previous history. Please know that I have spoken with Ron Krater of Gypsum Resources and invited him to join us Thursday to defend himself.

My hope is that after a few long-form conversations about Blue Diamond Hill with the relevant parties, the truth regarding the matter will rise.

We publish; you deduce.1)Copyright pending?

See you next time.

-Brian

[End Note]

 

 

Jordan Flake: Hi, I’m, Jordan Flake and I’m an attorney with Clear Counsel Law Group and welcome to ClearCast. Today we’re really happy to be joined by Justin Jones, also an attorney here in town. We want to address something that we believe is probably near and dear to the hearts of a lot of our viewers, a lot of our clients, a lot of our friends on social media. That is the topic of Red Rock. I don’t know about you, but whenever I have people come from out of town, they sometimes ask like, “You know, what is there to do in Nevada or Las Vegas besides the Strip.” I’m quick to tell them about the fact that there’s a really beautiful Red Rock Preserve just a few minutes from downtown that’s really fun to go visit to kind of strike a contrast with the downtown Strip.

Justin, maybe you can tell us, I know that you go by the handle “The Red Rock Guy” on some of your social media. What sort of … You’re an attorney and you relate to this on a legal matter, which we’ll discuss in a second but I think it’s safe to say you also relate on a personal level. Maybe I’ll have you address that quickly first.

Justin Jones: Sure. And thanks Jordan for the opportunity to sort of talk about this issue and it is personal for me. I don’t live too far from Red Rock, out in the Southwest part of town. I hike out there. I’m out there with my family on Saturday afternoons, at Spring Mountain Ranch. I was out there, did a trail-run this morning in the rain. It’s my happy place. I love to be out at Red Rock, whether it’s in the winter or frankly out in the summer. My family was out there earlier this week. We’ve had a lot of rain and snow and we were able to go to the Children’s Discovery Trail and see the waterfalls, which you just don’t get to see around here too often. My kids had a blast playing in the water. We’re just fortunate, like you said, to have such a national treasure right here within 15, 20 minutes of the Strip.

Jordan Flake: Absolutely. I’ve been up Ice Box Canyon, hiking with my family. There’s all kinds of great things to do out there. I don’t think anybody disputes that. Unfortunately, for many years now, the county’s been kind of embroiled in a legal battle in which there’s kind of, as I see it, three main actors. There’s the Jim Rhodes of Gypsum. He’s a developer. He wants to develop some land that he purchased from the BLM that is basically Red Rock land. It would basically have a huge influence on that, like you said, that national treasure. There’s the county. They’re kind of in the middle trying to say, “Well, you know, we do have democratic processes in places for development of property. That’s part of what’s on the books.” Then there’s, can I call it Justin’s group? You’re not the President but you’re the lawyer representing Save Red Rock. Is that right? What can you tell us about Save Red Rock?

Justin Jones: Save Red Rock was started about 15 years ago, not just around this issue of the development but around other issues in the Red Rock area. There are a lot of cyclists out there who had trucks going past them on a daily basis. They really got started after one of these cyclists, unfortunately, was killed by a trucker.

Jordan Flake: Oh, did not know that.

Justin Jones: Save Red Rock had worked with the legislature and the county to ensure that there were good speed limits, better speed limits out there, and also to widen the bike lanes out on this Red Rock Scenic Byway, which is State Route 159.

Jordan Flake: My father-in-law loves biking out there. We want to keep him safe, obviously. Right now, can you give us … I know the procedural history is complicated but what’s going on right now? What’s the current battle? How’s it shaping up? How do you and Save Red Rock play into what’s happening right now? My understanding is Rhodes is trying to take a 2,000 acre parcel of land and get it approved for subdivision that would allow several houses on each acre. It would bring potentially 14,000 people and accompanying traffic and infrastructure to this area that just is right, butts right up against Red Rock. You’re trying to stop that obviously. What more can you tell us about that situation?

Justin Jones: Sure. Jim Rhodes bought this land more than a decade ago. When he bought it, it was actually an old mine, a gypsum mine. When he bought it, it is zoned that he can build up to one house per two acres. It’s not very dense up there right now. The land is surrounded by the Red Rock National Conservation Area on three sides and by BLM land on the other side. In 2010, after some dealings with the county, he submitted an application for development up there. The county approved that plan, with some modifications. Then Save Red Rock, they reached out to us and asked us if we would join with them to pursue a land swap so that they can build down in the valley as opposed to up there and we thought that was a good idea. We joined with Jim Rhodes and pushed the BLM and our congressional delegation to try and make that happen. Unfortunately, the BLM in the end decided they didn’t want to go forward. Also during that time, Rhodes didn’t pursue his plan and didn’t do what he’s supposed to do under the county code in order to avoid expiration.

Jordan Flake: So his plans that were approved were, in your view, expired.

Justin Jones: Correct.

Jordan Flake: Which would require him to do that-

Justin Jones: Start over.

Jordan Flake: Start again.

Justin Jones: Right.

Jordan Flake: In the meantime, there was also a statute passed that was deemed unconstitutional and it kind of embroiled the county and the state in some lawsuits with Rhodes. That’s relevant because the county and state had to battle it out with Rhodes and pay a big fine or pay settlements and things of that nature. Now, what’s happening with the county?

Justin Jones: Well, this is interesting. Back in June of last year, Rhodes went to the county and said, “Hey, I want to restart that application that we had back in 2011.” The county said, “Sorry, you have to start over.” Rhodes went ahead and submitted a new development plan, paid all the fees and started the process, first going through the citizen advisory council for Red Rock. They said no. They recommended disapproval of the plan. Then went on to the planning commissions, sort of a three step process here. Went to the planning commission and the planning commission heard it in October and unanimously recommended denial. They recommended denial on a number of issues, one of them was that the county has a comprehensive plan. It sort of lays out all the land use values for the entire valley. That area is designated as rural. The planning commission said, “Based on a lot of the traffic and other issues that were raised, as well as on the comprehensive plan, we recommend denials.” That was a big win for us. We weren’t sure that was going to happen. We sort of walked out of there happy, thinking, “Okay, well surely the county will listen.”

Jordan Flake: You just won. Yeah

Justin Jones: Right.

Jordan Flake: You just won because the commission, or hopefully, almost won because they just they looked at it, they examined it and they said no, so you kind of walked out of there really happy. Then what happened. This is where the story gets sad for you.

Justin Jones: This is where it gets kind of weird. The county commission had planned to hear the application on December 7th. On December 7th, they decided they were going to postpone that vote to February 8th. Then two days later, I’m at a pro bono lunch and I get this email that says that the Clark County Commission, that Clark County had sued Save Red Rock. I was stunned. This was completely foreign to me that the county would sue a grassroots conservation organization that’s trying to protect our national treasure right here in the Las Vegas valley. There were a bunch of different claims in there. One of them was seeking to prevent Save Red Rock from raising issues at the county commission that it had raised before in the 2011-

Jordan Flake: Because the county is trying to say that plan had never actually expired, even though all of the behavior by both of the parties would indicate that it had expired. They’re now saying, “That never expired, therefore, Save Red Rock you needed to complain back in 2011, not now.”

Justin Jones: Right. Just to be clear, at the planning commission meeting, the county’s own agenda says that the county determined that the prior application expired. That’s not just us saying that. That’s what the county had said publicly.

Jordan Flake: The county’s admitting that it had expired. Their behavior is consistent with the idea that it expired. Now they’re coming along, trying to muzzle you in effect, saying “You had your chance in 2011 to oppose this and you didn’t.”

Justin Jones: Right.

Jordan Flake: Okay. There’s really kind of two things that interested us and interested Brian in this story is one, preserving this national treasure that’s in our back yard and two, preserving something that is even more important than Red Rock and that’s our right to free speech, our right to protest things. Those are kind of the two issues out on the table. Let’s just take each one in turn. What can you tell us or tell our viewers to get them really motivated and to understand. You can even pitch your website if you want to. Not your website. Save Red Rock website. To get them to understand what’s at stake here, currently.

Justin Jones: The proposal right now is for more than 5,000 homes to be built on top of a mountain that is next door to the conservation area. Under the proposal, they’re saying 5,000 homes but frankly, if you read the actual text, it could be 8,000 or 9,000 homes. Like you said, that can be 14,000 people living in 5,000 homes or it could be more than that if they ended up building more homes than that. We go from zoning of one home per two acres to two and a half per acre. That’s a 500% increase in the zoning for that area.

Jordan Flake: Density of residents.

Justin Jones: Right. Big change in the density. There’s also an issue of how do you get up there? Right now there’s just one dirt road that comes from the Red Rock side. The county’s already said they can’t use that road. The BLM has already said they don’t have a right of way for traffic to go up there. The alternative is that they have to go up the east side of the mountain. To get there, they have to come off of Blue Diamond Road, which is already congested as a result of Mountain’s Edge and Rhodes Ranch and all of the other development that are along the Blue Diamond Road.

Jordan Flake: You’re sitting here as an attorney for Save Red Rock, and as somebody who on a personal level enjoys Red Rocks, saying, “I don’t want 5,000, 8,000 homes. I don’t want the infrastructure that’ll make future approval of kind fill in developments.”

Justin Jones: Right. It’s more than that. If this were a developer who had a pristine record, maybe things will be a little bit different. Jim Rhodes has a long history of bankruptcies. He has a history of walking away from projects in Arizona and Nevada. He has a history of not doing what he said he was going to do. With Rhodes Ranch, he was supposed to build a nice park right there. The county and others had to fight him for years just to get him to do what he said he was going to do.

Jordan Flake: Initially, to get-

Justin Jones: Promises of this is going to be a beautiful development with lots of open space sound great, but he doesn’t exactly have a great record.

Jordan Flake: You’re concerned it’ll just be a money grab that will have no regard, whatsoever, for the physical impact and things of that nature. He’ll just try to get through things as quickly as possible.

Justin Jones: Exactly.

Jordan Flake: That’s where Justin is coming from and it’s a valid concern for somebody like me who loves Red Rock and wants to preserve that in our back yard essentially. Talk to me a little bit, or talk to us a little bit about this, the anti-SLAPPing too. Preserving Red Rock is not the only thing on the line, we also talked about is the county trying to muzzle you. Do you feel like your first amendment rights are at stake here, to some extent?

Justin Jones: I think absolutely. If you guys understand what anti SLAPP means. SLAPP suits are strategic lawsuits against public participation. There were several states over the last few decades that passed anti SLAPP laws, which basically say, “If you’re trying to shut somebody up, the party they’re trying to shut up has the ability to go straight into court, quickly, and file a motion to dismiss that gets in front of the court and says, ‘Hey, they’re trying to abridge our first amendment rights. Dismiss this lawsuit or dismiss the claims that are trying to shut us up.'”

Jordan Flake: That’s interesting. We actually had a situation on our website where somebody was just ripping us apart on Facebook for something we didn’t do. They were just having cousins and aunts and uncles join on and we thought about suing them. Then we were concerned about that, whether or not that would fall under this anti SLAPP situation so we kind of held off to try to find other ways to do it. It was very very unfair but it, ultimately, as a law firm, we want to side on, we want to be on the side that says, “People get a chance to discuss openly and publicly what should be done. You feel right now by the country saying that 2011 thing never expired, you guys can’t fight it, that they’re essentially trying to take you out of the public forum.

Justin Jones: It’s more than just the they’re trying to go back to 2011. They actually, their second claim in the lawsuit actually says we should be barred from raising arguments that were raised in 2011. Based on that, we filed an anti SLAPP motion to dismiss and that’s going to be heard early next month. We’re pretty optimistic. We did not ask to dismiss the whole lawsuit because there are some other claims that we feel are at least legitimate for going forward. They did aggressively file a motion for summary judgment during the holidays, so we responded to that motion for summary judgment earlier this week. We feel pretty confident that at the hearing the judge is going to side with us and agree on some of the other issues in the case.

Jordan Flake: We’ll have to see how that goes. We’ll follow that closely. You’ll be the one at the hearing, making the arguments?

Justin Jones: I’ll be arguing.

Jordan Flake: Well, good luck with that and you know, really what’s at stake here is this concept of, can a county, this is why this is a little bit shocking to Brian and me, it’s a little scary with your regular citizen worried about a county filing a lawsuit against a grassroots environmental organization saying, “You can’t participate in this public forum contest.”

Justin Jones: It’s your taxpayer funds that are paying the lawyer to sue you as citizens.

Jordan Flake: You as citizens and I need to at least be very educated about the fact that this is happening. Our county representatives are, it appears, according to Justin Jones, reaching out and putting their hand over the mouth of a grassroots organization. That’s a big concern in our democracy. That being said, if you’re out there and you’re the county or you’re Jim Rhodes and this video happens to make it up on your laptop, feel free to come in and give us your side of the story. We try to fair at ClearCast and hear everybody out. Maybe there’s something that we’re misunderstanding. Jump on our Facebook. Comment on there. Jump on our blog. Make comments. We’re happy to hear all viewpoints.

Justin, I found what you say really concerning and persuasive and educational. I really appreciate it. Anything, last word you want to throw in here before we go?

Justin Jones: Sure. Again, thanks so much for the opportunity. If you want to learn more, be sure to go to saveredrock.com. We have a petition that we started in September to keep Red Rock rural. We already have nearly 30,000 signatures. Go on there, sign a petition and learn more about this issue.

Jordan Flake: Justin, thanks so much. We really appreciate you joining us.

Justin Jones: Thank you.

Jordan Flake: Thanks so much and we’ll see you next time on ClearCast.

 

 

Footnotes   [ + ]

1. Copyright pending?

ClearCast #15: Our Friends at VidAngel May Have Some Trouble On Their Hands

Welcome to today’s ClearCast! A fun one for Episode 15!

I feel like our audience will be divided into two groups: those whom are fully invested in this legal battle with no further explanation needed1)“Get to the lawyers already!” I hear you. & those of whom that have never even heard of VidAngel. If you are in the former group, please feel free to skip right to the great episode; I won’t be offended in the slightest.

Now for the rest of you, (I’m in this group too don’t feel bad), you have got to check out this VidAngel company. The marketing is hilarious! I’ve enjoyed it thoroughly.

In essence, this streaming service provides a means for consumers to censor movies in the way that they choose, whether it be censoring language or violence.

I’ll let Mr. Flake and Mr. McArthur explain the specifics of how it works.

For those of my friends of the more liberal persuasion that likely are objecting to on the grounds of “censoring art,” I have a couple of questions for your consideration.2)Mr. Flake and Mr. McArthur have some great ones of their own as you’ll see

  1. Shouldn’t parents be permitted to introduce their children to socially questionable material on their own terms instead of what Hollywood thinks is best? (as in, the majority of society has questions about certain behavior)3)Is this about Freedom?
  2. Wouldn’t you at least concede the the violent imagery/language on tv/in movies is more extreme now than it has ever been?4)For those of you who say “then just don’t watch it.” Don’t worry..

I don’t have children, but these desires seem very reasonable to me.

Nor do I have a stake in this fight5)I have not nor would likely use the service, but I certainly pity the good folks over at VidAngel. From what I’ve seen, I really think they meant well.

Thanks for watching!

-Brian

[End note]

..There’s been an update! The 9th Circuit ruled; see below.

Jordan Flake: Welcome to Clear Past. I’m attorney Jordan Flake and I’m really happy to be joined by Matt McArthur. He’s an attorney in our firm who practices in bankruptcy. Even though this video isn’t about bankruptcy, you’ll see that Matt has some experience that makes his viewpoint on this subject relevant. What we’re gonna talk about today is in response to this New York Times article that’s catching a lot of interest. It says here, “Hollywood: Faith Goes to the Movies.” What the article addresses is the streaming video service called VidAngel. Now, I know a lot of my Facebook friends and family have used VidAngel. We’ve had conversations about it. I’m sure you’re the same.

Matt McArthur: Sure.

Jordan Flake: Have you used VidAngel before?

Matt McArthur: I have.

Jordan Flake: Okay, so you’re a consumer of VidAngel.

Matt McArthur: Yeah

Jordan Flake: Tell us why you wanted to use it, how it works. A lot of you probably already know, but just by way of review Matt’ll talk to us about how it works and then we’ll get into what’s happening with the lawsuit. Go for it.

Matt McArthur: The way VidAngel works is you go through their services, through their website or their app and you purchase the digital rights to a movie or a television show, and it’s akin to a cross between Redbox and Netflix where you can stream the video content that you’re purchasing and still have the option of being able to keep it for a short period of time, sell the digital rights back after a day, and still be able to recoup the vast majority of the expense of actually buying the movie. In the past, my recollection is a little fuzzy here, but it was about $1.50 or something in that neighborhood to be able to watch a movie for 24 hours and be able to give those rights back to VidAngel.

Jordan Flake: Great, and so what happens then is you buy a video off of VidAngel, you purchase it for a good reasonable fair market value, they have a digital copy which they’ve purchased that corresponds with your copy. In that sense the studios are being made whole by the fact that there’s an actual copy corresponding with the copy that you purchase in your home?

Matt McArthur: Correct.

Jordan Flake: Why VidAngel? What’s VidAngel?

Matt McArthur: The neat thing about VidAngel is unlike Redbox or Netflix, by using the VidAngel app you’re actually able to edit the content that you’re consuming. If you wanted to filter out all of the F-words in a movie or all of the graphic violence or nudity, you can filter that right out of the movie and be able to watch a movie that you are otherwise unwilling, or perhaps your children were unable to watch.

Jordan Flake: Brian’s off camera here. Brian, did we get some of Matt’s beautiful children in this?

Brian: They are in the shot you bet.

Jordan Flake: Are they in the shot? Okay, because we have here Davis, and Allie and Dex. We don’t necessarily want these little children of yourself watching some of the content, but at the same time there’s some really great stories out there. I don’t know if Davis is ready for Last of the Mohicans or something like that, or Lord of the Rings, Lord of the Rings being a great one. There’s just a few things that might be too scary for kids his age.

Matt McArthur: Sure. You’re able to consume the vast majority of-

Jordan Flake: Do you remember what VidAngel movie you watched? Maybe you don’t remember.

Matt McArthur: I do remember. We watched Argo. I didn’t watch that with the kids, but I watched that with the wife and that was a movie that we would have otherwise not watched. My wife’s appetite for that type of material in movies is perhaps not as high as some others.

Jordan Flake: Argo’s a great example because you take a few language elements and there’s really nothing super violent about it, there’s nothing inherently inappropriate from a sexual, nudity standpoint. You win. You’re winning because you’re bringing in this movie in the home. From VidAngel’s perspective they’re winning because when they sell you the movie and buy it back, they get to pocket the dollar or $1.50 or whatever from the transaction.

Matt McArthur: By the way, if you decide that you like the movie so much, you can retain the digital rights.

Jordan Flake: You don’t have to send it back. It’s $19 or whatever. From VidAngel’s perspective, they would also say, “Hey, the studios are winning because we bought a copy to correspond with the copy that we sold to the McArthur family. Now, obviously they’re upset. The studios are very upset at this. I think the reason’s they’re upset probably go beyond the scope of my understanding of the industry, frankly. At a bare minimum, we know that the studios make these contracts with Netflix, with Redbox, with Amazon, Amazon Prime, Hulu, Blockbuster, whatever. The VHS at Blockbuster. Bryan’s dying off camera here. Basically, they want to be able to control the digital content. I wouldn’t be surprised if in the final analysis, in the smoke-filled room where the diabolical studio executives are sitting, just kidding. The real question here is one of how to control the digital content, not just for this one little VidAngel slice of our story, but also prospectively in the future. How do we make sure that we control this?

Matt McArthur: I was just gonna follow up on that presumption you’re making. Do you think it’s more of a artistic license freedom issue or is it a monetary issue, or both?

Jordan Flake: Both because I think there’s a situation where the movie creators, the creative minds, they get done meditating in the morning and having their chai latte. I’m so full of stereotypes today. What’s going on? The point is they say to the studios, “I want creative control over this.” If the guy who produced Argo, which I think is an excellent movie, if he comes along and the studios say, “Hey, by the way, one of the ways that Argo’s gonna get disseminated out to the public is by way of VidAngel, and they’re gonna take your movie and make it appropriate for five year olds.” They’re gonna say, “Well I’m not gonna do business with you, studio, because I have my artistic standards and I want my work to be protected.” I definitely think that there’s a creative, protect the creative process, “my movie is a work of art and I want it to be put out in the marketplace the way that I intended it to be put out there, not in some other diluted form.”

When this originally happened with CleanFlicks, another prior company that underwent a similar lawsuit, Steven Spielberg took great exception to his masterpiece, Schindler’s List, being totally neutered by CleanFlicks, turning it into a story about a really nice business guy who hooked up some victims with an additional life. The violence, for Steven Spielberg, was a necessary element to show the horrific suffering of the Holocaust on the one hand, and the extreme magnanimity of Schindler in purchasing and doing what he did to preserve these lives on the other. To him, it was a huge affront to take this and gut it, from a creative angle.

Matt McArthur: I get where you’re going with that, but at the same time, if you look at what TNT or TBS does when they’re replaying movies for the general TV audience, there’s censoring.

Jordan Flake: Or what they do on airliners, right?

Matt McArthur: Sure. That can’t be the whole story.

Jordan Flake: They’re responding to a market need. That’s all the VidAngel are trying to say is, “We’re just responding to a market need here, and one of our needs is the McArthur children. We want to bring quality films like Argo, take out the few objectionable parts and makes it so that Misty McArthur can enjoy viewing that movie. I understand that. That’s the creative side. The money side is obviously they don’t want Jordan Flake purchasing 10 digital copies of a movie and then going to my friends and saying, “Hey everybody, I’m gonna create Jordan Flake’s digital streaming platform, and I’m gonna rent these movies out to you, and you guys are gonna give me three bucks back.”

Matt McArthur: They’re being completely cut out of the deal.

Jordan Flake: Cut out of the deal because I’m the guy, it’s sort of a Napster except for Napster was illegal downloads, this would be legal downloads, but unanticipated hosting, me capitalizing off of somebody else’s hard. Those are kinda the big questions. VidAngel, I’ve seen their videos, their ads are funny. They run a very good defense of what they’re trying to accomplish and what they’re trying to do. Let’s talk a little bit about one of the cases right now. Right now there has been an injunction issued against VidAngel.

Matt McArthur: Take a step back. Big studios are suing to stop VidAngel.

Jordan Flake: Studios are suing to stop VidAngel and saying, “This represents a huge end around of our entire industry. It threatens the creative side, it threatens the monetary side, and we gotta shut VidAngel down.” VidAngel’s waving their hands and saying, “How can you tell me I can’t buy a Pablo Picasso. I can buy a Pablo Picasso and I can tape other little figures in the Pablo Picasso or I could cover parts of it with sticky notes because it’s mine. I own the Pablo Picasso, I can put sticky notes on it. Then I can go back to the art dealer and say, “Hey, the sticky notes didn’t do any damage cause it was on the outside of the frame. Now I’m gonna sell you this Pablo Picasso back and you get to keep some of the money from the transaction. How can you tell me what I can and can’t do with your art that comes into my home?”

This is where the streaming rights, it gets very complicated, the monetary angle, what the studios are allowed to do, what they’re not allowed to do. The studios have agreements in place with the creative minds that we won’t let certain things happen with your content. That’s where it becomes an issue and they sue to shut VidAngel down. They did something called an injunction. Although that’s not my area of expertise, civil litigation, my understanding is that an injunction is basically saying, “Hey listen, Your Honor. We need to shut these guys down now.” It might take two or three years to resolve this case, but in the meantime VidAngel shouldn’t be allowed to operate because they’re doing irreparable damage to us by not allowing us to capture the profits that we would otherwise. They’re probably hurting our relationships with Netflix because one VidAngel tagline is ‘See this movie before it becomes available on Netflix,'” which must have the studios pulling their hair out.

There’s the irreparability angle, and also there’s a likelihood of success of the merits angle. It’s probably pretty hard to get a California court that are traditionally very liberal, traditionally very everybody has their day in court, to issue this injunction unless there really was a likelihood of success on the merits. Right now there’s an injunction in place and they’re saying, “You can’t go show these movies.” I guess, Bryan, was there a violation of the injunction?

Brian: My understanding is that Neal kept putting movies up on VidAngel after the injunction was put in place.

Matt McArthur: Neal is the owner of VidAngel, correct?

Brian: Yeah, he’s putting up new films as well. Sully, and two other films.

Jordan Flake: Just the mere fact that we’re saying Sully, I can see the directors and creators of Sully saying, “That was a family movie to begin with. Why am I subjecting it to this filtering service?”

Brian: Maybe Tom Hanks is saying, “I want as many people as possible to see my movie.”

Jordan Flake: Exactly, maybe he’s saying, “Let it go with this. I want the McArthurs, who for whatever reason they object to the use of this word or that word, they’re still getting the main idea of the film. They’re still getting to appreciate a nobility of the character, etcetera. That’s this current legal status. Do you have any thoughts about what’s likely to happen, how it’s gonna go down, what you hope happens?” Just give your take on that.

Matt McArthur: I can’t say that I used VidAngel a lot, but the times that I did use it, I was very impressed. It really opened doors to us that were otherwise shut, either because me and my wife were unwilling to watch a movie with content that we didn’t really appreciate, or because I wasn’t going to subject my children to certain types of content. For me, as a market consumer, it gave me more options and more content. Quite frankly, it was really convenient. It was like I didn’t even have to go down to the Redbox and rent the blue-ray. I could just stream it from my own home, and have a really nice, cheap on-demand type service, or I could just stream the movie. From my perspective, I would love to see VidAngel be able to overcome this lawsuit and be able to continue it. Whether it’s working out some sort of arrangement with the production companies to where they’re being cut in, or winning outright.

Jordan Flake: I think that’s where consumers probably would, if they’re thinking about this clearly, that’s what we would all hope for.

Matt McArthur: There’s some kind of room for a middle ground where everybody can win.

Jordan Flake: There’s gotta be a way that says, “Hey, listen, studios. Why don’t you create VidAngel, brought to you by the studios?” Then I think the hangup there is that the creative side might not appreciate that, but then you have the TNT, TBS, airline exceptions. Why don’t those things come into prevalence? This is obviously a big bowl of fish hooks. I think one thing I can say is we can’t have a situation where regular consumers are setting up movie hosting sites that undercut the studios. The reason why I say we can’t have that situation is because if the studios can’t make money off of streaming, they’ll stop creating movies and then it’ll be incumbent on the individual users to create movies, the individual hosting sites to create movies. That’s something that VidAngel is facing right now. Netflix is coming up with original content. Honestly the Netflix original content is probably a surprise for most people. Wouldn’t have thought that Netflix was going to be doing its own shows.

Matt McArthur: Yeah, they had some … They had some big hits there.

Jordan Flake: Several years ago, they’ve had some really good hits. Maybe that’s one angle, is VidAngel can do its own content. Maybe there is some comprise to be had between the studios and VidAngel. It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out. I definitely hear you on the content things. Under any circumstances, the McArthurs certainly are not going to change their mind about allowing certain content in the home. It’s just not gonna happen.

Matt McArthur: Quite frankly, if the movie companies are being cut in on some of these rental profits that VidAngel’s currently making, it’s simply broadening our horizons.

Jordan Flake: We’re very interested. We know we have viewers out there who, like Matt, have tried VidAngel and were very curious to see where you stand on this. We’ll keep you posted if there are any interesting developments in this story. In any event, it’s very interesting to see how this’ll progress. Thanks so much for joining us for Clear Cast. Definitely let us know how you feel about this. Thanks.

Matt McArthur: Bye, everyone.

 

[Endnote]

The 9th Circuit denied the emergency petition from VidAngel. (The 9th Circuit is essentially “the California circuit”. Hard to imagine them weakening the copyright protection of Hollywood, yes?)

Next week I’m going to explain why as a Nevadan, you should be concerned if they don’t add a ninth justice to the Supreme Court.

How do you feel about living under California law?

Stay tuned..

Footnotes   [ + ]

1. “Get to the lawyers already!” I hear you.
2. Mr. Flake and Mr. McArthur have some great ones of their own as you’ll see
3. Is this about Freedom?
4. For those of you who say “then just don’t watch it.” Don’t worry..
5. I have not nor would likely use the service
Clear Counsel Law group

Contact Info

1671 W Horizon Ridge Pkwy Suite 200,
Henderson, NV 89012

+1 702 522 0696
info@clearcounsel.com

Daily: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
Saturday & Sunday: By Appointment Only

Copyright 2019 Clear Counsel Law Group® | Nav Map

Nothing on this site is legal advice.