Per news and USA Today today the lead in story line is “Poor little Dannielynn Birkhead, 3. And we mean that literally.”

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled today that Anna Nicole Smith’s estate (i.e., Dannielynn, Anna’s daughter) is not entitled to a single penny from Smith’s husband, oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall.

Anna Nicole Smith’s case will not go back to lower court which awarded Anna Nicole Smith $88 million. So another trip to the U. S. Supreme Court? Will the insanity of the lawsuits end now that there is no money to fight over? There is no need for Larry Birkhead and Virgie Arthur to continue to fight over the guardianship of the money everyone hoped would be needed to take care it. Arthur said the money was tainted, now that there is nothing to fight over, will Birkhead allow Arthur to now visit a broke Dannielynn? It is possible for Smith’s Estate can ask for a rehearing, especially since this was a 2-1 vote. They could also take it back to the U. S. Supreme Court. I did contact some of the lawyers for a quote on the record, Virgie Arthur’s lead attorney, Neal McCabe said; “…except to say that we have not been involved in a fight over the so-called “Marshall money,” about which Virgie has not made a claim.”

Howard K. Stern can now be released as the Executor of Smith’s Estate, Larry Birkhead will keep Dannielynn and poor Dannielynn owes a LOT of legal fees the Estate has accumulated. Dannielynn at age 3 has to hope the Estate Property stolen with the money made on those sales will put some money in her bank account.

LATEST FILINGS IN HARRIS COUNTY BY VIRGIE ARTHUR A MOTION TO COMPEL ART HARRIS TO COMPEL WITH DISCOVERY. I HAVE ALSO INCLUDED THE CASE QUOTED SINCE IT IS FROM JUDGE ROSENTHAL THE FEDERAL JUDGE THAT ALL OF THE PARTIES RESPECTED.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 19, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

Judge Wieman of the 80th District Court of Harris County in Houston has put the trial date for Virgie Arthur vs. Howard K. Stern, TMZ, Harvey Levin, Art Harris et. al. off until September 27, 2010b due to a conflict by the Court for September 21, 2010.

This will move the last conference set by the trial coordinator also back from September 11 to September 13, 2010.

CBS FILES MOTION TO SEVER THEM FROM HARRIS COUNTY SUIT AND MAKE THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT FINAL APPEALABLE

After weeks of negotiating with Virgie Arthur’s attorney, Neil McCabe, CBS has filed a Motion to Sever and make the summary judgment final and thus able for Virgie Arthur to Appeal. However, since CBS wants to Sever from ALL of the other defendants where will this leave Art Harris’ need for a lawyer especially with his hard drives in question by the Court. Could Jackson Walker state, there is a conflict of interest now that they have seen part of Special Master Craig Ball’s questions, and if so can they now dump Art Harris as a client and leave him hanging by himself? If Neil McCabe agrees and Babcock leaves Harris, will the fact that Harris did really appear to have destroy evidence on his computers and external hard drives, will that help Arthur win? The Motion has been set via Notice of Submission for March March 29, 2010 at 8:00 AM plenty of time for Arthur to agree and join CBS or for Arthur to Oppose. This is going to get interesting. What if Babcock feels there is an ethical reason to remove CBS from Harris?

In other news Virgie Arthur filed her Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Response to Virgie Arthur Motions for Sanctions today, March 17, 2010. For those that state that Arthur’s counsel never quotes case law or decisions in Arthur’s filing this one is packed full of those references.

LATE NEWS ARTHUR JOINS CBS’ MOTION TO SEVER

FILINGS ON MARCH 18, 2010 IN HARRIS COUNTY STATE DISTRICT COURT. THIS INCLUDE THE PROPOSED CBS-ARTHUR ORDER TO SEVER CBS, AND THAT ART HARRIS HAS RESET HIS HEARING WITH AN AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING UNTIL APRIL 30, 2010 ON HIS MOTION FOR PROTECTION.

I have not had time to go through all of the cases quoted but will do so and list those that I feel have a direct correlation to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions on Stern and his lead counsel L. Lin Wood.

I don’t think there is “gamesmanship” between Wood and Neil McCabe as there is in most cases lawyers argue over, this is getting personal and I would not expect either one of them to invite the other to dinner EVER. Nor do I think at the end of these litigations that either will ever have a good word or thought for the other. That said Wood did send sincere condolences upon John M. O’Quinn’s tragic death so this to might just be “gamesmanship”. I still remember what Joe Jamail said upon O’Quinn’s death that they were never enemies that for a time O’Quinn had a picture of the two of them in O’Quinn’s office. However what stuck out to me is Jamail saying the ONLY enemy he ever had was the lawyer on the other side of any case. Thus when you get to attorneys at the level most of these operate in, the upper echelon then there are few lawyers you have very much in common with; thus the saying that lawyers only friends or other lawyers.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 17, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: 80th Disctrict Court Harris County, Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Entertainment Tonight, First Court of Appeals Houston Texas, First Court of Appeals Texas, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Honorable Larry Weiman, Howard K Stern, Judge Larry Weiman, Judge Larry Weiman - 80th District Court, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

Howard K. Stern mailed his Response to the First Court of Appeals on Friday, March 12 to be entered by the Appellate Court on March 15. Stern’s Response is to Virgie Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions against Stern and attorney L. Lin Wood.

March 12, 2010 Response by Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit A filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit B filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit C filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit D filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit E filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

March 12, 2010 Exhibit F filed with Howard K. Stern to Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions.

Status Conference held with the Honorable Larry Weiman of the 80th District Court of Harris County on March 12, 2010 at 3:30 PM.

Those in attendance in person:

Diana Marshall for Larry Birkhead
Neil McCabe for Virgie Arthur with a young associate that I did not get the name when Mr. McCabe introduced him.
One or two lawyers for TMZ not sure if it was Richard Hess and/or Harry Susman, whoever was there for TMZ did not talk at all during the conference.
A male attorney from Jackson Walker that I had never heard the name before and he did not speak during the conference either.

Those in attendance by phone conference:

L. Lin Wood for Howard K. Stern who was on vacation in Utah and on a day trip up a mountain but wanted to be present.
Luke Lantta for Howard K. Stern who was in the office in Atlanta Georgia
Rose Turner who was in my home in Gladewater Texas.
Charles “Chip” Babcock entered the telephone conference partial through the conference but did not speak during the conference hearing.

The conference stated at 3:30 PM and lasted until almost 5 PM, other than introducing myself and asking one question about the Special Master Craig Ball although I was part of the conference by phone I took notes.

The main parties talking with Judge Weiman were Mr. Wood and Mr. McCabe.

Diana Marshall coming in for two rambling comments, that I thought could have been better stated in one or two sentences. However, Ken thought when I told him that perhaps it was one of those misdirections to get off of her client, Larry Birkhead doing a deposition before any hearing for a Special Appearance on Jurisdiction that he filed or providing the server he uses for emails. If that was the purpose she succeeded in running out the clock and not having any deposition or production of doucments or naming an email server of her client brought up by the Court or the parties.

Ms. Marshall was a good friend of John O’Quinn’s had ran in his social circle, belong to the same country club and knew him very well, HOWEVER that said, she has stated before that she never forgets who butters her bread, the client, in this case Birkhead. Ms. Marshall seemed to side more with Mr. McCabe then she did with Mr. Wood, although I frankly got lost in part of the two long ramblings I felt she did toward the Court and of course the clock.

The judge impressed me he knew the statutes and he controls his courtroom, he is cordial to all but he is a very smart guy and had a beautiful voice.

At one time they were referring to a Rule 11 agreement between Stern and Arthur that had been put in the record in 2008, Wood did not have a copy with him and Mr. McCabe did have it but was going to go through the file to pull it out, and INSTANTLY the judge had his copy from the jacket of documents he had related to the case and read it into the record himself. Now that was impressive to me and showed he had read all of the filings and anything else that might come up on Friday.

Mr. Wood pushed for a hearing on the long pending Special Appearance of his client, Judge Weiman asked if there had been a hearing at all on the Special Appearances and Wood and McCabe said something like briefly in December 2008. The Court spent time on Howard K. Stern’s deposition on both jurisdiction and merits asking at one time in order to move the case along would Mr. Wood be willing to have two depositions, one for jurisdiction and then if needed one for the merits of the case later.

The Court then asked why something in regards to Howard K. Stern’s deposition had not been decided before this time, and that brought up could Steve Sadow, Stern’s criminal attorney be there, which McCabe had previously not wanted and Wood had insisted on it. Mr. McCabe very quickly said he would be willing for Mr. Sadow to be present as long as he abides by Texas state statute, which allowed him to be there but not to talk, make co

Tags: 80th District Court of Harris County, Amamda Bush Esq., Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Bryan Cave LLP, CBS - Entertainment Tonight, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Chrystal Baker, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Diana Marshall Esq., Entertainment Tonight, First Court of Appeals Texas, Harry Susman Esq., Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Honorable Larry Weiman, Houston Texas, Howard K Stern, Jackson Walker LLP, Judge Larry Weiman, Judge Larry Weiman - 80th District Court, Ken and Rose Turner, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, QV - Queen of Vondonia, Richard Hess Esq., Rose Turner, Steve Sadow Esq., Supreme Court of Texas, Sweet Havana, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur, Yvonne Barnhart Waddle, Yvonne Waddle

Late last night, at midnight I received the filings by Richard W. Hess of Susman – Godfrey Law Firm; the Motion for Summary Judgment by TMZ Productions Inc. and Harvey Levin in the Virgie Arthur vs. Howard K. Stern defamation suit pending in the 80th District Court, Harris County.

The hearing for the Motion has been set before the Court for Friday, May 5, 2010 at 8:30 A. M. before the Honorable Larry Weiman in Houston Texas.

In the filing for Summary Judgment TMZ and Levin state that the April 19, 2007 article that Arthur and her stepbrother had a child together is literally true, substantially true as a matter of law and that the unpublished details of Virgie Arthur’s stepbrother relationship are far more damaging than what TMZ published. They also state that the Cause of Action of Conspiracy to Defame is not true and as such should be dismissed.

TMZ.com and Levin state that the stepbrother story was a NON-TMZ publication that the Summary Judgment should be granted on a non-evidential Motion as Texas Statute allows.

Attached to the Motion for Summary Judgment is a sworn declaration by attorney Richard Hess with the following:

Exhibit A: TMZ.com’s April 19, 2007 Article

Exhibit B: Interrogatory Responses of Virgie Arthur

Exhibit C: Texas Department of Health Birth Roll for 1949 – David Luther Tacker Sr.

Exhibit D: Texas Department of Health Birth Roll for 1951 Virgie Mae Taber (Arthur)

Exhibit E: Marriage Record of Paralee Allman and George William Tacker

Exhibit F: Texas Department of Health Birth roll for 1966 (David Luther Tacker, Jr.)

Exhibit G: Texas Department of Health Birth Roll for 1967 (Vickie Lynn Hogan)

Exhibit H: Texas Department of Health Birth Roll for 1972 (Donald Ray Hart, Jr.)

After I have time to read the Motion, Declaration and Exhibits I may have more observation on this Motion for Summary Judgment.

Some of you wanted to read the Chrystal Baker Sworn Statement from May 9, 2008 for some comparisons.

TARRANT COUNTY LATEST FILINGS

March 5, 2010 Odell Files to Join Vicedomine’s Motion to Dismiss or for Special Exceptions.

March 10, 2010 Stephens Motion for Continuance and more time to Answer multiple filings.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 10, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: 80th District Court Harris County, Anna Nicole Smith, April 17 2007 Virige Arthur article, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Bryan Cave LLP, Celebrity Trials, Certified Marriage Record, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, David Luther Tacker, David Luther Tacker Jr., Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Diana Marshall Esq., Donald Ray Hart Jr., George William Tacker, Harry Susman Esq., Harvey Levin, Honorable Larry Weiman 80th District Court Houston, Howard K Stern, Interrogatory, Judge Larry Weiman, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Literally true, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Paralee Allman, Richard Hess Esq., Richard W. Hess, Rose Turner, Substanially True, Summary Judgment, Susman Godfrey LLP, Teresa Stephens, Texas Defamation Statute, Texas Department of Health Birth Roll, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ Article Virgie Arthur, TMZ Productions Inc., TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

Here are the papers, I have to read through these to know what they are referring to. Art Harris also filed a Notice of Hearing on March 9 2010 on his Motion for Protective Order to be heard on April 16, 2010 for 11:00 A. M in the 80th District Court in Harris County.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit A filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit B filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit C Part 1 filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit C part 2 filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit C part 3 filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit D filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit E filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit F filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit G filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit H filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit I filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

March 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit J filed with the Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Opposition to Discovery.

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS IN HOUSTON FILED TODAY, MARCH 9, 2010:

March 9, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Motion for Sanctions with the First COA on Howard K. Stern and counsel L. Lin Wood.

March 9, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit A Motion for Sanctions with the First COA on Howard K. Stern and counsel L. Lin Wood.

March 9, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit B Motion for Sanctions with the First COA on Howard K. Stern and counsel L. Lin Wood.

After I have time to read through theses if I have any thoughts on the latest filings I will post those here with this article.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 9, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

On March 8, 2010 Larry Birkhead without waiving his pending Personal Appearance disputing Jurisdiction filed his Original Answer to Virgie Arthur’s Fourth Amended Complaint and the point he was Designated as a Responsible Third Party in June 2009.

I have not read the Amended Motion to Designate Responsible Third Party in a while as I would guess most of you have not so I have included that for discussion.

Please don’t refer to me as an “alter ego” of Virgie Arthur, remember attorneys file all kinds of rhetoric on behalf of their clients. I think the record of articles on this blog would prove just the opposite about me and how many times I have written that if my son, who I am estranged from died, I would have decided to handle it completely different from the way Virgie Arthur choice to handle the death of her estranged daughter. I do hope one day I am able to write about being a ping pong ball in the midst of these mega super lawyers on behalf of their clients.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 8, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Diana Marshall Esq., Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

For now I am putting up these papers and then will come back to fill in the article with what I AM allowed to say about discovery which by the very nature of the Agreed Protective Order in this case is very minimal.

March 3, 2010 Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit A Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit B Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit C Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit D Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit E Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit F Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit G Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit H Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit I Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Exhibit J Art Harris’ Motion for Protective Order.

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K Stern’s Exhibit A filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Exhibit B filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Exhibit C filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Exhibit D filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Exhibit E filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

March 3, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Exhibit F filed with Response to Virgie Arthur’s Motion to Compel

The old documents filed on February 25, 2010 that I did not know about until these appeared on other sites by those site owners and then partially transferred to Topix.net. I was able to received copies of these this morning.

February 25, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Response to CBS Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court’s Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

February 25, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit A filed with Arthur’s Response to CBS Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court’s Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

February 25, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit B filed with Arthur’s Response to CBS Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court’s Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

February 25, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit C filed with Arthur’s Response to CBS Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court’s Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

May 8, 2009 Transcript of Hearing.

Texas Rules of Civil Procedure involving Discovery.

Now that I have read everything on these multiple Motions and Response with exhibits etc. filed by everyone else, I have a few comments, including those emails of my filed on February 25.

Most of what you see in filings about discovery is a SMALL very SMALL part of what is being produced and what is going on behind the scenes.

1. I alone have 2 filed cabinets, 4 legal boxes, 2 additional boxes and a stack over 3 feet high of documents produced in this lawsuit that I am going to have to buy one more legal box and still have tons of it left over to overflow from my desk. Most of us Pro Se litigants have BEGGED to not be sent any more “paper” but to PLEASE serve us by agreement via email. Some of the parties involved have understood and said “sure”, others continue to bombard us with paperwork in a quantity that our local mailman told Ken to thank the law firms for keeping his job stable.

2. You have a GREAT divide between the haves and the have nots, squarely related to those with attorneys and those of us trying to muddle through all of this while being honest and not knowing that there are zillions of loopholes to attempt to screw the Pro Se Litigants because we don’t have the legal knowledge. A lot of days I actually have chest pains from all of this.

3. NONE of you should ever slam Special Master Craig Ball and the reason is at least two of these top law firms in Texas USE him all of the time as an expert forensic examiner in a host of cases. (It is NOT the O’Q Law Firm BTW). Mr. Ball strikes me as the type that has a lot of experience walking the mine fields this type of suit puts him squarely in. I read one article by another attorney about how great it is to attend one of Mr. Ball’s seminars and that he refers to himself as a “recovering attorney”. He was also nominated and won consultant of the year for 2009. So before you say he was bought off, try to be objective here and realize he has a great sense of humor to survive all of the pulls on him by law firms knocking him right now in this lawsuit, but will turn around and immediately hire him for the next big case. He has a lot of respect for those he has worked with before, and stays clear of the name calling. After all as one of the law firms keep putting in filings this is called “gamesmanship”, the other lawyers and Craig Ball have a lot of experience in this “gamesmanship” that the rest of us do not have as Pro Se Litigants.

4. I have talked to a lot of different lawyers throughout the state about this new e-discovery that is taking hold in both state and federal courts as the ability to this is a fast moving new aspects of lawsuits. EVERY ONE of them have told me that “Rose I can explain away almost anything on someone’s computer, but if a party to a lawsuit destroys things on their computers you might actually go to jail or it will cost someone a LOT of money to try to keep you out of jail”. Folks that hit home with me and I took it so seriously is why I had all of these DVDs of hundreds if not thousand of megs I have turned over in evidence.

5. This brings us to the DVDs EVERY party and every law firm involved in this suit is entitled to all of the production. Thus I did three DVDs in January, which EVERY party has a copy of them. I did 1 or 2 more DVDs in May or June by Court Order that AGAIN every party and law firm has received as well. I have done at least 3 if not four DVDs for production that CBS has asked for, including all drafts, case law etc. I have learned throughout this lawsuit. I think almost everyone has those DVDs from January 2009 through February 2010. As well as those I turned over in February in plenty of time for CBS to do any prepping they needed before the hearing on February 26.

6. I was asked to verify in emails between Mr. McCabe and myself to just verify a rough number of about how many DVDs and how many hundreds if not thousands of documents I have been requested from multiple law firms to produce, that is what I verified in those emails. I think all of the parties in this suit has “favorites” they prefer to work with but we are not given that option.

7. I HAVE no dog in this fight and I am trying to survive with my ethics in tact I HAVE NOTHING to lie about or attempt to cover up, and I BELIEVED that alone would be enough. Sadly I have learn that is not the case and it is really only about “gamesmanship”. It has nothing to do with honesty or trying to be up front with these other parties. Some of them are nice and some of them are hired guns that if you have enough money they will try to win and get the client out of any potential jail time or looking bad because that would reflect on the lawyers. It is kind of hard to stand up and say “Hey your honor, my client destroyed everything on a computer or more and what can I say now”. You know that attorney-client privilege that prevents a lawyer from ratting out a dishonest client.

8. Of the lawyers involved in this fiasco, the one firm I have found always trying to take the high ground and never throwing a fellow party under the bus is Bryan Cave. IMO they have represented their client in a superb way without trying to take down an “unimportant” fellow party in this mess.

In the end each of you can think about me what you want to but the ONLY thing I have going for me is honesty, it does not work everyday in this hell I am in, but it does on most days. BTW Ms. Contrary, my hard drives have already been cleared of containing any illegal things on it, if not that is the first thing that would have been reported to the Court and law enforcement nor have I been asked for any money from any of these firms to say something one way or the other. I have done nothing illegal to go to jail for; so suck it up.

Now for our regular members I am going to start a thread in the member only forums where you can ask me questions and I will answer if I can without crossing the line which none of can do in this hell of a suit.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
March 4, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur