Digging Deeper wrote on October 25, 2008 11:39 AM:
2005 DEPOSITION: Lawyer links judge to scheme
He says Mosley suggested records could be falsified

Donald Mosley
District Court judge tried to help girlfriend avoid foreclosure, lawyer says

In a deposition taken for a trial under way in Las Vegas, an attorney says District Judge Donald Mosley hatched a scheme to help his girlfriend avoid foreclosure on her home.

In a sworn deposition taken in May 2005, Las Vegas attorney James E. Guesman says Mosley in 2001 suggested payroll records could be falsified to make it appear Mosley's girlfriend, Tawanna Crabb, was employed, although she actually had been out of work for months.

Guesman's deposition goes on to say he withdrew as Crabb's bankruptcy lawyer after Mosley suggested that another local attorney could alter employment records to make it appear Crabb worked for the unnamed attorney. (DAVID WINTERTON)
Crabb subsequently named Guesman a defendant in her foreclosure-related lawsuit.When asked why Crabb didn't get a job, Guesman in his deposition states, "My opinion is that she had visions of grandeur. She had earned, I think, in the area of $50,000 at a job she'd had prior to getting in this financial difficulty, and she wasn't willing to look at any job other than one that would pay in that bracket. And I don't think she had the qualifications to -- at least didn't seem to have qualification to get a job in that bracket. ... I was encouraging her just go out and get a minimum wage job and we could do the reorganization (for the bankruptcy), and she just didn't do that."

Crabb eventually filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which doesn't offer the same level of protection from debtors as the Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection that Crabb had wanted.

JUDGE JESSE WALSH HEARS CASE AFTER MANY RECUSE. ???

attorneyreview wrote on October 22, 2008 08:10 PM: slm; file the complaint. It must be specific. Give to press first, then the JDC. That is the only way it works. Your attorney does not want his name on it.

slm wrote on October 21, 2008 05:47 PM: Last year my case was on appeal to a District Court in Nev. After a short time in the court room you could see who was in bed with who. 3 days later the Judge rules against me. 3 days later I SCREAM there was a "conflict of interest"! Judge recuses himself and seals my decision! My lawyer also advised me not to file a complaint. Says, "they never work". Tell me who is straight????

insidetherjc wrote on September 26, 2008 01:29 PM: insidetherjc wrote on September 26, 2008 01:12 PM: No, it was not tmosley, her name was Melinda, one of the Judge's girls. See Case.

Site as Schlafer v State NV Supreme Ct Case No. 31028

Tom Schlafer (paramedic) shot Judge Mosley's girlfriend in road rage incident. Felon Wallach snitched and Schlafer was convicted in second trial.

See Wallach Felony Dist. Ct. Case No. 94-C-119409-C
Felony Charges Dismissed by Judge Mosley

attorney review wrote on September 26, 2008 11:03 AM: Obviously if you look at the tall one on the bench you can see he can't "control it".

Didn't this surface years ago when one of his girlfriends got shot after leaving his dinnerparty? Paramedic Schafer? Was the then girl, tmosley?

rzuck wrote on September 15, 2008 06:12 PM: Continued from Judicial Discipline Complaint:

Count XI- Continued to communicate with McLaughlin and his wife after
recusing himself in McLaughlinƒ s criminal case, the continued
communication creating an appearance that Judge Mosley was rewarding
the McLaughlins for assisting him in his custody dispute.

After a three-day evidentiary hearing, the Commission concluded that Judge Mosley
committed the violations admitted in Counts I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, and VIII, and dismissed
Counts V, IX, X, and XI. Judge Mosley was ordered to attend the first general ethics course at

rzuck wrote on September 15, 2008 06:10 PM: In re Mosley, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 94 (2004) JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE- EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, MISUSE OF JUDICIAL LETTERHEAD, AND FAILURE TO RECUSE IN A TIMELY MANNER This case is an appeal of the evidentiary findings of the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline (Commission) on eleven different counts of an official complaint filed by a special prosecutor against the Honorable Donald M. Mosley (Judge Mosley). The complaint listed eleven inappropriate actions Judge Mosley allegedly committed from August of 1997 through August 1999. The counts alleged that Judge Mosley: Count I- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the principal of his sonƒ s school in August 1999; Count II- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the principal of his sonƒ s school in February 1998; Count III- Engaged in an exparte conversation with friend Barbara Orcutt,regarding the arrest and release of Robert DiAmore in August 1999; Count IV- Ordered the release of Robert DiAmore on his own recognizance, without notifying the district attorneyƒ s office, after the police arrested DiAmore on a bench warrant issued by a different district court judge in August 1999; Count V- Engaged in an exparte telephone conversation with Catherine Woolf, an attorney representing Joseph McLaughlin in a criminal case that was assigned to Judge Mosleyƒ s chambers; Count VI- Engaged in an exparte conversation in his chambers with attorney Woolf in August 1997; Count VII- Engaged in an exparte conversation with Woolf, McLaughlin and McLaughlinƒ s wife in August 1997; Count VIII- Failed to recuse himself from McLaughlinƒ s criminal case until after Mrs. McLaughlin had testified in Judge Mosleyƒ s custody case; Count IX- Communicated with McLaughlinƒ s wife regarding McLaughlinƒ s incarceration; Count X- Assisted McLaughlinƒ s wife in obtaining the return of her vehicle; Count XI- Continued

Lawyer Review wrote on September 11, 2008 03:24 PM: Results:
Nevada Supreme Court
Highest retention vote: Mark Gibbons 86%
Lowest retention vote: Nancy Saitta 45%
8th Judicial District - Civil and Criminal
Highest retention votes:
David Barker 92%
Stewart Bell 91%
Allan Earl 90%
Mark Denton 88%
Douglas Herndon 88%
David Wall 88%
Lowest retention votes:
Donald Mosley 56%
Michelle Leavitt 56%
Kathy Hardcastle 54%
Lee Gates 43%
Jessie Walsh 41%
Elizabeth Halverson 8%

Part II wrote on August 23, 2008 06:27 PM:
Part II wrote on August 23, 2008 06:12 PM: In a March ruling by the commission related to other complaints, the panel determined Donald Mosley committed several ethics violations during a two-year period. The commission fined Moseley $5,000 and issued a censure. The findings included the determination that Mosley failed to recuse himself from a case involving a man who testified on his behalf during the child custody dispute.

Mosley, who is up for re-election this year, has adamantly disputed any contention that he committed ethical violations. He has said he is confident appeals with the Nevada Supreme Court eventually will clear him.

"The genesis of this is in a child custody battle," Donald Mosley said during an August interview. "Most will understand what that is all about."

Terry Mosely, who represented herself at Monday's proceedings, said outside of court that the hearing allowed her to question the judge on the witness stand about their custody arrangement and events leading up to it.

She said she now has visitation with the pre-teen for 48 hours every two weeks.

Hinueber said part of Estes' ruling to close the courtroom was based on Terry Mosley's request in court early Monday to excuse witnesses and spectators from the room.

Terry Mosley disputed that, saying she simply wanted witnesses who were going to testify in the matter to leave. She said she later made it clear in court that she had no opposition to an open hearing.

Hinueber said that issue might have become moot, however; because while the Review-Journal was arguing against the closure of the hearing, an attorney for Donald Mosley indicated that the judge wanted the hearing closed to the public.

Part I wrote on August 23, 2008 06:26 PM: Part I wrote on August 23, 2008 06:12 PM: JUDGE BANS PUBLIC, PRESS FROM HEARING IN CUSTODY BATTLE
Newspaper Protests Ruling in Mosely Case
By Glenn Puit, Las Vegas RJfile:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/XP/Desktop/Judge%20Estes%20Bans%20Public%20Hearing%20-%202002.html

District Judge Donald Mosely's contentious, years-long custody dispute was the focus of a closed Monday hearing at the Clark County Courthouse.

"It's a custody matter," visiting District Judge Robert Estes of Yerington said in justifying his decision to close the hearing.

The Review-Journal officially protested the decision.

The newspaper's attorney, Mark Hinueber, said he argued the news media should be allowed to attend because the Mosley custody case has become a high-profile matter. Hinueber also argued that federal courts consistently have ruled that the press and public have a right to access civil proceedings.

Hinueber said Estes respectfully denied the request to open the proceedings.

"He said he had to be guided by both state statute and what is in the best interest of the child," Hinueber said.

According to 8th Judicial District Court rules, in Family Court cases a child custody dispute can be ordered private at the request of either party involved in the proceedings.

In this particular case, Mosley and the mother of his son, Terry Mosley, have feuded for years over custody of the boy. The judge was awarded primary custody in June 1998, a prior ruling that Terry Mosley has fought vigorously.
The dispute has created problems for the judge.

Terry Mosley filed a complaint with the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission over the judge's decision to keep the custody case's court file in his chambers. Donald Mosley resolved the complaint by writing a private letter of apology early this year.

VoteOutLeavitt wrote on August 17, 2008 08:13 PM: WatchingTheShow wrote on August 17, 2008 08:06 PM: Captain Obvious; you must not have seen Judge Leavitt storm in with all of her indignation at the idea that she would be accused of violating a subpoena.

Prior to her arrival, the staff attorney who accepted "everyone's subpoenas" informed the commission that Judge Leavitt was watching the proceedings on TV. Then we learned that the reason she did not appear as directed in her subpoena is because she was in a Capitol Murder Trial.

Well, usually we regular folk must show up as directed and wait in the hallway, sometimes all day, before we testify. We are not given an appointment and we are not always informed as to what questions would be asked.

Perhaps this is just one of those "perks" like ticket-fixing that only those employed at the RJC are afforded so often that they come to expect it.

Let us pray there aren't too many judges busy watching TV while "in the middle of a capitol murder trial".

Read All Comments