Legislature says Brooks’ petition is legally defective

By Cy Ryan

Friday, March 15, 2013 | 5:20 p.m.

The attorney for the Legislature says the petition filed in the Nevada Supreme Court by suspended Assemblyman Steven Brooks is deficient and doesn’t follow court rules.

Legislative counsel Brenda Erdoes says the lawyer for Brooks failed to file documents by the deadline as required by the court.

“Despite the magnitude, complexity and importance of the constitutional issues raised in this case, Mr. Brooks’ petition is lacking in cogent legal argument and citation to authority” as required by the rules and the law, she maintained.

Erdoes is required to file her answer to the Brooks petition by Monday, but she is asking for a nine-day extension.

Because of his erratic behavior, Brooks was barred from the Legislative Building and he is seeking a court order to permit him to be seated. A special committee in the Assembly is to consider whether to strip him of his elective position.

Mitchell Posin, attorney for Brooks, filed the emergency petition with the court, which directed him to submit additional documents by March 13. But he missed the deadline and the copies were not filed until Friday.

Erdoes said the petition “has fallen well below the high standard of diligence, professionalism and competence” expected by the court.

In addition, she said the entire legal argument submitted by Posin “consists of three conclusive paragraphs containing citations to only two cases and no other legal authorities.”

Erdoes also said the “resources of the (legislative) legal staff are urgently and immediately needed to complete all bill drafting by this legislative session’s bill introduction deadlines of March 18 and March 25.” A bill requested by a lawmaker must be introduced by Monday and by committees a week later.