Articles.
Definitional notes on Nevada trial and appellate practice — written for the referring attorney, the family or business confronting a serious matter, and the practitioner who needs the procedural framework distilled. No substitute for engagement; a starting point for understanding what the engagement entails.
- Case NoteMay 2026
Jespersen v. Harrah’s and the Ninth Circuit sex-stereotyping dissent
A case note on the en banc Ninth Circuit appearance-policy decision in Jespersen v. Harrah’s, the Price Waterhouse sex-stereotyping theory Mr. McKenna advanced, and why the four-judge dissent still matters in employment-discrimination litigation.
Jespersen v. Harrah’sTitle VIISex stereotypingPrice WaterhouseNinth Circuit en bancTrial counsel - Practice NoteApril 2026
What SCR 250 actually requires of capital defense counsel in Nevada
A definitional walk-through of Nevada Supreme Court Rule 250 — the rule that sets minimum qualifications for lead and second-chair counsel in capital cases — and how the SCR 250 framework interacts with NRS 175.552, the Sixth Amendment effective-assistance standard, and the procedural posture of capital appellate work.
SCR 250Capital defenseNevada Supreme CourtPenalty hearingMitigationWitherspoon-WittFederal Death Penalty Act - Practice NoteApril 2026
Engaging trial counsel: when a Nevada lawyer hires another lawyer to try the case
A practitioner-oriented note on engaging trial counsel for Nevada matters — what local counsel, co-counsel, trial specialist, and appellate-counsel engagements actually mean, and how Nevada SCR 42, D. Nev. Local Rule IA 11-2, Ninth Circuit Rule 46-2, and Nevada RPC 1.5(e) shape each engagement.
Trial counselPro hac viceNevada SCR 42D. Nev. Local RulesNinth CircuitEngagement lettersNevada RPC 1.5(e)