Batter up! Well that is what it seemed when I saw two of my friends in court, Peter Lauzon, Esq. and none other than Neil Hersh, Esq. Peter is representing Jason Kendall and Neil is representing Chantel Kendall, and it is nothing less than “you’re out!” Jason Kendall is a ball player with the Kansas City Royals. Peter was nice enough to introduce me, and Mr. Kendall seems like a real nice guy. It was a 5-6 year marriage and I have no idea what went wrong, but certainly it seemed like it was 5+ very long innings. And I would not hold my breath waiting for any “overtime,” this game is “rained out,” for good.

I spoke to Chantel briefly and she too seems very nice, great-looking gal, tall and slender and she was carrying a great handbag. …Commissioner James D. Endman is presiding over the case, Neil Hersh and Peter Lauzon were very nice to each other as they postured for a serious bombing run of each others’ clients, the calm before the storm if you will. And with these two titans of divorce you know that it will get ugly, it has to and why you ask? Sean Stewart…who? SEAN STEWART, Rod Stewart’s kid…he is the other man! I am not sure when he popped up but he is there and it has to be a little chafing to Mr. Kendall to see him around his soon-to-be-ex wife.

It is reported that Chantel Kendall and Sean Stewart met in re-hab, …He too seemed like a nice kid and who am I to judge, we are all who we are. …

…But how cool must it be to be Rod Stewart’s kid? Sean has had years of difficulty with drugs and alcohol and has fought a tough battle with those demons. …the stress of a divorce can push even a strong and sober individual over the edge…remember, divorce is a nasty and horrible experience. …

To read the rest of the exclusive on Jason and Chantel Kendall’s Divorce be sure and visit Desperate Exes.com while there browse some of the other great writings by John J. Nazarian.

http://desperateexes.com/2010/03/09/sean-stewart-chantel-kendall-jason-kendall-major-league-divorce/.

©John J. Nazarian
March 10, 2010
Used with the permission of John Nazarian P. I. – writer
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 our featured author, John Nazarian, 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: calm before the storm, Celebrity Trials, Chantel Kendall, Chantel Kendall’s Divorce, Commissioner James D. Endman, Desperateexes.com, DIVORCE, Divorce Hollywood Style, High Profile Trials, James D. Endman, Jason and Chantel Kendall’s Divorce, Jason Kendall, Jason Kendall baseball, Jason Kendall Kansas City Royals, Jason Kendall’s Divorce, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., Kansas City Royals, Neil Hersh, Neil Hersh Esq, Peter Lauzon, Peter Lauzon Esq, Rod Stewart, Rod Stewart’s kid, Rod Stewart’s son, Sean Stewart, Sean Stewart rehab, titans of divorce

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

Happy Birthday “No Fault Divorce,” 40 years old and counting. Well, happy for some anyways, certainly not for all. It was 1970 when the California law took effect. Now it is practiced in every state, except New York, ahhhh the East, gotta love em!

“No Fault Divorce” is a wonderful thing, except for one little thing, the human element. What is that you ask?… …blood pressure meds are a bitch. Oh for sure “No Fault” is here to stay, and so is the human element. …

…No Fault is for many just a legal term, and private investigators know darn well that there has to be “fault” and it is laying right next to “reason.” It has to be someone’s “fault” that he or she no longer loves me, and further more I want to know the “reason.” Just like in the days before No Fault. …

…No Fault there are several states that are not so friendly towards the female part in the divorce, for example Ohio. Ohio seems to lean towards the sperm donor’s side in regards to community property and support…it is just how it seems to me. I love the Chili Dogs in Toledo.

Happy Birthday “No Fault” and thanks for keeping a roof over my head!

Be Sure to Read the Rest of this article about the “new woman” or the “abs” on DesperateExes.com and while there read the article this is referenced to. Yes I did steal John J. Nazarian’s graphic artists work. Sorry but it was just too cute to pass up. Be sure you browse DesperateExes.com for other articles we don’t pick up; there is an array of great articles there.

http://desperateexes.com/2010/03/01/happy-birthday-no-fault/.

©John J. Nazarian
March 1, 2010
Used with the permission of John Nazarian P. I. – writer
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 our featured author, John Nazarian, 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: 40 Years No Fault Divorce, Bert Fields Esq., California, Celebrity Trials, Desperateexes.com, Divorce Hollyweird Style, Divorce Hollywood Style, Gloria Allred Esq., Happy Birthday - No Fault Divorce, High Profile Trials, human element, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., Lisa Helfend Meyer Esq., Michael Trope Esq., New York Divorce, No Fault Divorce, Ohio, Private Investigators, Ron Rale, Trope and Trope

In the Order issued last Friday, February 26, 2010 which granted CBS Motion for Final Summary Judgment, Judge Larry Weiman of the 80th District Court for Harris County did not state a reason, which is typical in District Courts in Texas.

It is interesting to note that the Order signed on Friday, February 26 is the PROPOSED ORDER that CBS filed on October 1, 2009 at the same time the Motion for Final Summary Judgment was presented to the Court. It appears this settles also the claim that Howard K. Stern and/or Art Harris “conspired” with CBS on any of the three interviews. The two quoted in Federal Court and this one in State Court.

Interlocutory Orders are rarely given by Civil District Courts in Texas, except perhaps in Family Court in regards to temporary Orders of child support, visitation etc. In Civil Courts in Texas an Interlocutory Summary Judgment would have allowed Virgie Arthur, in this case, if she uncovered evidence during the pending of the rest of this suit to file a Motion for the Court to Reconsider it’s decision on the CBS Summary Judgment and/or Order.

Interlocutory in Texas Statute is most often used for Appeals when a Motion for Summary Judgment is Denied; which then allows the proceedings to be stayed while the Interlocutory (fast tracked) Appeal is being heard by the Appellate Court on a much shorter time frame then normal Appeals for the whole Case. It is my understanding from someone observing the hearing last Friday, this is what Mr. Charles “Chip” Babcock argued to the Court. That it would in fact be his right for CBS Studios Inc. if the Court denied his Motion for Final Summary Judgment to immediately file an Interlocutory Appeal. If you want some case laws regarding this I will be glad to provide those I researched.

The setback in this “Final Summary Judgment” for Neil McCabe on behalf of his client is that Virgie Arthur cannot file an Interlocutory Appeal. CBS has been totally dismissed from this case unless it is called back in as a third person non-party witness. This Final Order on the Motion for Summary Judgment means CBS Studios Inc. is gone from this suit until such time that this case is totally over and some party files a “General Appeal” on the whole case. This is not good news for Arthur since CBS was the ones with “deep pockets” and the one that she could recover the most from in a jury trial.

In other news the 352nd District Court for Tarrant County has granting Wilma Vicedomine’s request for a hearing on her Special Exceptions and Motion to Dismiss under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 13.001 of Teresa Stephens suit in its entirety, that hearing is set for March 11, 2010 at 1:30 P. M. at the same time Judge Suddeth hears Neil McCabe’s and Don Clark’s Motion on Special Exceptions.

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

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: 352nd Disctrict Court in Tarrant County, 80th Disctrict Court Harris County, Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Honorable Larry Weiman, Howard K Stern, Judge Larry Weiman, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rose Turner, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur