November 7, 2023
On October 24th, Plaintiff notified the court they were requesting a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the case against the named defendants, but did not mention LVMPD. Two days later the Court published an order directing Plaintiff to clarify, by November 3rd, if the dismissal was to include LVMPD. When the Plantiff did not respond, the Court Dismissed without Prejudice the case againt ALL Defendants.While not a case where Mr. DeCastro is listed as a Plaintiff or a Defendant, on July 17, 2023, attorneys for Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department filed a MOTION TO PRECLUDE JOSE DECASTRO FROM PRACTICING LAW WITHOUT A LICENSE AND TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AS AN IMPROPERLY FILED PLEADING. It appears the attorney noted sections in this case that are word-for-word copies of statements in the complaint filed in DeCastro v. Las Vegas Metro PD, along with YouTube videos of Mr. DeCastro, offering to help people file complaints, providing instruction on how to write complaints, and performing activities that, in Nevada, can only be done by a qualified attorney.
On October 25, 2023, the Court Denied the Motion [10] and [11], mentioned above, for the reasons stated in [49]. However, the Court cautioned Wallace that he "may not reply on a non-lawyer to ghostwrite his filings" and if later the Court determineds that any non-lawyer did, the Court would strike those documents and "the person engaged in the unauthorized practice of law may face criminal penalties."
Case Related Videos
Body Cam Video Often Has No Sound For Up To the First 30 Seconds
NOT ©2024 by ThePublicDocuments.com
