As the California Criminal Trial of Howard K. Stern, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and Khristine Eroshevich looms for August 4, 2010, the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith tightens the noose on four major witnesses.

You have to wonder if this will affect the credibility of Ford Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson as well as attorney Susan Brown. It also appears that Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers III for the South Carolina Federal Court decided to issue this Order without need of a Hearing.

On July 1, 2010 the Court in South Carolina issued an Court Order allowing the addition of Gaither Thompson II, Gina Shelley, Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia. The new defendants have twenty one (21) days to answer the Amended First Complaint so don’t look for this to go to trial before the criminal charges in California is tried to conclusion.

HERE ARE THE HIGH POINTS I FOUND IN THE COURT’S SEVEN (7) PAGE ORDER

“Plaintiff asserts causes of action for conversion, wrongful taking of estate property in violation of California Probate Code § 850, et seq., statutory and common law commercial appropriation of right of publicity in violation of California Civil Code § 3344.1, unjust enrichment/restitution, unfair competition in violation of California Business & Professional Code § 17200, et seq., violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5) and civil conspiracy.

That the Estate’s property has been distributed to other entities including Geraldo Rivera with Fox News, the O’Quinn Law Firm, former television journalist Rita Cosby, and the California Department of Justice.

Counsel for Ford has consented to the filing of the proposed Amended Complaint. See Email from MacDonald to Lantta dated October 28, 2009. Thompson has not filed a Response in opposition the motion. The only opposition comes from proposed new Defendants Brown and the Law Firm. 1 Brown argues that allowing the amendments would be prejudicial to her and would be futile as to the claims against her. Brown does not appear to oppose the addition of Gaither, Melanie and Gina as Defendants in this action or to the addition of factual allegations regarding Ford’s distribution of Estate property to other third-parties.

[Brown] argues that she would be prejudiced due to the fact that she has not had the opportunity to participate in discovery as a party. However, in his Response, Plaintiff asserts that he is not opposed to amending the deadlines in this case to allow Brown to conduct discovery.

Brown argues that, as former counsel in this case, she is immune from the claims Plaintiff seeks to allege. Generally, an attorney is immune from liability to third persons arising from the performance of his or her professional activities as an attorney on behalf of and with the knowledge of his or her client. See Hunt v. Mortgage Electronic Registration, 522 F. Supp.2d 749, 758 (D.S.C. 2007). However, both Thompson and Ford testify that they did not authorize her to distribute Estate property to the O’Quinn Law. Firm.

The Clerk of Court is directed to file the Amended Complaint, which is attached as an exhibit to Plaintiff’s Motion. Plaintiff must serve the Amended Complaint within 15 days of the date of this Order. Defendants must respond in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ok after reading the First Amended Complaint I see this is the same exhibit filed with the Court in September 2009, so nothing new here; just has not read it in almost a year.

FILINGS ON JULY 1, 2010 WITH THE SOUTH CAROLINA COURT.

July 1, 2010 Court Order allowing the First Amended Complaint to include Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1, 2010 First Amended Complaint filed by the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit A filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit B filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit C filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit D filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit E filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit F filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit G filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit H filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

July 1 2010 Exhibit I filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia

Summons to Serve on Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson

Summons to Serve on Susan M. Brown and the Law Offices of Susan M. Brown

LATEST FILING IN THE TEXAS CASE I have not had time to read any of these papers.

July 7, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Compel Production.

July 7, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit A filed with Response to Art Harris Motion to Compel Production.

July 7, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit B filed with Response to Art Harris Motion to Compel Production.

July 7, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit C filed with Response to Art Harris Motion to Compel Production.

July 7, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Exhibit D filed with Response to Art Harris Motion to Compel Production.

NEWEST FILINGS IN THE VIRGIE ARTHUR VS. HOWARD K. STERN BREACH OF CONTRACT.

July 1, 2010, Howard K. Stern’s Special Appearance to Object to personal jurisdiction.

July 1, 2010 Stern’s Exhibit A filed with Stern’s Special Appearance to Object to personal jurisdiction.

For now we are NOT going to buy these papers due to cost, if it gets traction after the beginning of the Criminal trial or the August 6, 2010 hearing on Stern’s Special Appearance, then we will begin to purchase these papers as well.

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
July 6, 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, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Art Harris, Attorney General Jerry Brown, attorney-client privilege, Bahamian lawyer Tracy Ferguson, Beverly Hills, Birkhead, BKD LLP, BKD LLP Computer forensics, Bonnie Stern, Bryan Cave LLP, California AG Jerry Brown, California Business & Professional Code § 17200, California Civil Code § 3344.1, California Department of Justice, California Probate Code § 850, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, civil conspiracy, commercial appropriation, commercial appropriation of right of publicity, Computer forensic expert, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5), conversion of Estate Property, crime-fraud exception, crime-fraud exception attorney-client privilege, Dannielynn, Danny Santiago, Debra Opri Esq., Don Clark, Dr. Kapoor, Dr. Khris, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, Elisa Miller Esq., Elizabeth McNamara Esq., Florence South Carolina, Folkens Law Firm, Ford Shelley, FOX News, G Ben Thompson, Gaither Ben Thompson II, Geraldo - Live, Geraldo At Large, Geraldo FOX News, Geraldo Rivera, Gina Shelley, Gina Thompson Shelley, Greta -On The Record, Greta Van Susteren, Gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown, Hachette Book Group USA, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood, Hollywood California, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Horizons in the Bahamas, Horizons law suit, Horry County, Horry County Sheriff, Horry County Sheriff's Department, Horry County South Carolina, Howard K Stern, Joseph C Wilson IV Esq., Karl Alan Folkens Esq., L. Lin Wood, Law Offices of Susan Brown Esq., Lin Wood, Liz McNamara Esq., Louis David Nettles Esq., Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers III, Melodie Thompson, Myrtle Beach, Myrtle Beach south Carolina, Neil McCabe, Nicole Jennings Wade Esq., Pierce Herns Sloan and McLeod, right of publicity, right of publicity in violation of California Civil Code, Robert Klein Esq., Rose Turner, Seminole Tribe Authorities, Shane Gibson, Shane Gibson former Bahamian Minister of Immigration, South Carolina Federal Court, statutory and common law, Steve Sadow Esq., Susan M. Brown Esq., Susan P MacDonald Esq., The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Tom Pirtle Esq., Tracy Ferguson Esq., Tracy Ferguson of Callendar's Bahamas, unfair competition, unfair competition in violation of California Business & Professional, unjust enrichment/restitution, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Virgie Arthur, wrongful taking of estate property

It was not until this morning that the Harris County Court Site was updated, showing that Virgie Arthur won some and Art Harris won “some”, but what? To see this go to the Harris County Court web site at http://apps.jims.hctx.net/courts/. Pick the Oral Hearings Docket Inquiry on that page then pick the date of April 30, 2010 from the drop down menu and the 80th Court from that drop down menu and you will see the following: 10:30 HRS 200824181 READY DOCKET COMPEL ANS TO INTERROGS – MTN (TRCP 168) MCCABE, NEIL C. GRANTED IN PART And: 10:30 HRS 200824181 READY DOCKET MOTION FOR PROTECTION FROM DISCOVERY REQUEST BABCOCK, CHARLES LYNDE IV GRANTED IN PART

I look back at the Rita Cosby suit and how quick her lawyer had her hard drive imaged at the start of that lawsuit and I wonder if in August once Craig Ball’s questions came out about deleting thousands of documents did Art Harris’ lawyers at Jackson Walker have his hard drives imaged by their expert Kroll Ontrack. Which by the way was Cosby’s expert as well. If they did and that company did an Affidavit as they did in the Cosby case then I am sure Judge Larry Weiman gave the hard drives back to Harris to destroy. If they have not already had Kroll Ontrack image the hard drives, which I have not seen any affidavit that they have done the images, I would still bet that Judge Weiman would order the hard drives sent back to Chip Babcock the lead attorney for Harris with the assurance that just like in the Cosby case the imaged hard drives would go into their safe until all of this is resolved.

I went back AGAIN and read In Re Weekley Homes to see the gold standard of electronic discovery guidelines for Texas. I am still betting that future court decisions will rest on this standard for all Texas Courts. For the first time I caught and read the last sentence of that Opinion by the Supreme Court of Texas. “We note that HFG is not precluded from seeking to rectify the deficiencies we have identified.” That translate in this case to “We note that Virgie Arthur is not precluded from seeking to rectify the deficiencies we have identified.” That is why earlier I predicted that the document production would be rolled back to December 2008 and started over again.

Now let’s look at the requirements of In re Weekley Homes for an independent forensic expert under those guidelines to report on imaged hard drives. “In this mandamus proceeding, we must decide whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering four of the defendant’s employees to turn over their computer hard drives to forensic experts for imaging, copying, and searching for deleted emails. Because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the particular characteristics of the electronic storage devices involved, the familiarity of its experts with those characteristics, or a reasonable likelihood that the proposed search methodology would yield the information sought, and considering the highly intrusive nature of computer storage search and the sensitivity of the subject matter, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion.”

So we have the following to be “cured” on the do over that In re Weekley Homes allows to happen:

1. Arthur needs to be able to verify that she has obtained the “particular characteristics of the electronic storage devices involved.” Arthur is asking for all of that in the new Request for Discovery and Motion to Compel. See Questions 5 through 8. So on Arthur’s do over she is asking for this information. Also remember in the April 22, 2010 that the First Court of Appeals stated that the Court of Appeals was; “‘Conditionally’ granted the petition for the Writ of Mandamus. The Court of appeals stated on page 29 at footnote 9; “Harris argues that, while Arthur’s request for production did ask for emails, the requests did not specify the form in which the requesting party wanted the emails produced. This argument is not supported by the record. The instructions in the requests for production stated the form in which electronic files should be produced.”

2. Arthur needs to cure or clarify the forensic expert does have “the familiarity of its experts with those characteristics”. Arthur has already done this with Craig Ball. You may not like him but he still trains most of the judges in Texas and almost all of the forensic experts in the U. S. and even the U. K. have been trained or have attended seminars with Craig Ball so they all have respect for him. Thus Arthur in my opinion has met this standard In re Weekley Homes.

3. Arthur must also in the do over show that there is a “reasonable likelihood that the proposed search methodology would yield the information sought.” Or in this case confirm that thousands of documents were deleted.

Now my guess is that this will go back to the Court of Appeals under the do over Weekley Homes provides to the Texas Courts. I have no reason to doubt that Judge Weiman did not narrow the list of people to look for here as he did with Lin Wood, the attorney for Howard K. Stern, thus eliminating any “overly broad of discovery” issues. I think discovery will continue including an up coming day three of my deposition. To date McCabe and Jackson Walker attorneys have had all of the 12 hours of my deposition and now each gets to go back and ask clarifying questions I believe.

May 3, 2010 Art Harris Motion to Dismiss Case before Supreme Court of Texas without Prejudice as Moot.

So do I like Art Harris, I don’t know the guy, should he expect a Christmas card from me NOPE. Why? Because of him this lawsuit and discovery is going to go on like the energizer bunny and the filings are going to become very technical and time consuming for everyone.

On the TMZ filing due April 30th that they “passed” or ask the court to “pass” on the May 5, 2010 hearing for their Motion for Final Summary Judgment could be for a multitude of reasons. My “guess” is that it has something to do with the Pro Hac Vice pending for the California attorney, or to get the full team up to speed. Or Harry Susman of Susman Godfrey might think the filings they did on behalf of TMZ.com and Harvey Levin and Arthur’s filings speak for themselves and thus the Court can decide by the agreement of the attorneys to rule only on the filings without the need to run up legal fees that a hearing would add to all of their clients’ bill.

May 3, 2010 Notice of Submission by TMZ.com and Harvey Levin for May 10, 2010 without Oral Hearing.

When the Order comes out next week that probably Charles Babcock and Neil McCabe have been told to work together to prepare one for the Court to sign as is often done in win some and lose some hearings, then we will know who won what and who lost what in Friday’s hearing.

Remember folks what looks like common sense to all of us is not how the Court operates and with that said, I still like Judge Weiman and believe he is and will continue to go by the letter of the law and to unravel this mess.

I don’t know for sure and will look it up but I think Arthur has missed the filing deadline with the Court of Appeals to try to keep CBS and Entertainment Tonight in the case. So we have two parties out and the rest of us on a hold and see pattern.

Please go back and read the opinions I have listed in Federal Courts about deleting documents from computers since September 2009, in fact I will list them here again today in just a bit as I am also reading them in more depth.

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
May 1, 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 Houston Texas, 80th District Court of Harris County, Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, computer storage, Craig Ball, Craig Ball Electronic Forensic Expert, Dannielynn, E-Discovery, electronic discovery guidelines, Entertainment Tonight, First Court of Appeals, First Court of Appeals Texas, forensic expert Craig Ball, Harry Susman Esq., Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Honarble Larry Weiman, Howard K Stern, In re Art Harris, In re Weekley Homes, intrusive nature of computer storage, Judge Larry Weiman, Judge Weiman, Kroll Ontrack, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, mandamus, Neil McCabe, Rita Cosby, Rose Turner, Supreme Court of Texas, Susman and Godfrey, Susman Godfrey, Texas Supreme Court, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, trial court abused its discretion, trial court discretion, Virgie Arthur, Weekley Homes, Writ of Mandamus

This many high profile names in the headlines yesterday just from California is a good day for tabloid news, well except for Feel Good AG Jerry Brown of California. It almost appeared as the gubernatorial race is gearing up for 2010 Jerry Brown wanted some reason to give a press conference. Hey Mr. Brown, why Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and Dr. Khistine Eroshevich, you have a bag full of press time and face time if you would just discuss the case that is over shadowing the news media locally, nationally and internationally, remember Michael Jackson and Dr. Conrad Murray? The two doctors currently in court were doctors who main crime appears to be is being struck by the celebrity of their patient Anna Nicole Smith; thus involving a celebrity patient, Anna Nicole Smith, accidental death from prescription medication. On the other hand the Michael Jackson and Dr. Murray, involved a dangerous anesthesia, Propofol, IV poles and with a warning that a doctor is never suppose to give this powerful and potential lethal mediation except in the strict confines of a hospital under supervision with a crash cart nearby because it can kill your patient.

Dr. Perper ruled in Florida, that Anna Nicole Smith’s death was an accidental combination of prescriptions, with neither doctor that now faces a trial even present on her day of death. Michael Jackson’s death was ruled a homicide and that occurred in the state where feel good AG Jerry Brown, had jurisdiction over the corpse of Michael Jackson, you know he died in your state; jurisdiction over the dangerous Propofol anesthesia, equipped with IV poles, and a giant warning on it’s label of “DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME; and to make all of this a tidy backdrop for a picture perfect AG Jerry Brown to have a soapbox news conference. Brown has jurisdiction over all of the people, the celebrity death and the anesthesia and you have the physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, and yet Brown claims, if infotainment news is to be believed that Brown is laying low on the Jackson investigation, WHY?? Is that an admission that the Kapoor – Eroshevich investigation was botched by your office? Now that is not going to look good for an eighty year old “wanna be governor” who is setting his stars on the Smith death to gain the governorship of California just one more time. If you live in California would you want Brown in charge of your money and saving your state from total meltdown financially?

However, Brown not to be deterred sent his assistant attorney general; the one that would take over Brown’s job if at eighty Brown became sick while serving as the Attorney General of California. From the accounts inside the court room that poor man got his arse handed to him with a strong lecture, you have to wonder if this guy was worried that his boss, Brown was not going to get that face time Brown was hoping for. However, if Brown wants face time and plenty of it as the election year rolls around, my advice try concentrating on the Michael Jackson homicide, doesn’t his three small children deserve any less from the man who would spearhead any charges connected to their daddy’s murder/homicide?

Following sending Brown’s representative by to Brown’s office some strong directed words, only as Judge Wesley could do Brown’s guy was sent backing.

After the hearing, Eroshevich’s attorney, Adam Braun, told the media that; “There’s simply no basis to prevent her from practicing medicine at this point.”[This case] is related to a single patient and on its face, it’s laughable that she would [be deemed] an imminent threat to the public.”

Judge Wesley sat a “boring” Motion and how to interview those pesky people who stole a few things from Anna Nicole Smith and as one source who knows Ford Shelley said; he is strutting like a peacock saying he is the KEY witness in sending Howard K. Stern and the two doctors to prison. Well that is unless Shelley is indicted before he appears on some pesky federal charges for paying an FIDC bank loan off with a forged rental agreement which was not worth the papers Ford Shelley wrote it on. Shelley might just graduate from a no body to a high profile person in a way he does not want. Once source told us because of Shelley handling the family business in such a shell game stunt it has ripped the family apart and that Gina, Ford Shelley’s wife, has to do nails and hair to try to keep her husband afloat. I guess without Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s belongings to auction off for a flow of cash, Shelley is finding himself a tad broke, and minus family support. Wonder if this will be a wonderful holiday season for Shelley? Will the Thompson family invite him over for dinner, I am told don’t hold your breath and if you are going to make a bet, it would be that Shelley will be left out in the cold.

Back to the California criminal trial, Judge Wesley has set one “housekeeping” Motions, discovery, handing over more evidence to the defense etc. for Friday, December 18 and a tentative trial date of February 5, 2010. However, Steve Sadow, the lead attorney for Stern told the waiting press that because of Motions to be filed and the schedule of the Court his client’s trial might postpone until sometime in the summer of 2010.

I wonder if that will be enough time for Brown to decide to get the microphones ready for a series of news conferences to trout out the Jackson homicide for his gubernatorial campaign.

A court watcher media person told us from yesterday’s hearing that Stern looked more self assured, even with a tad of arrogance. My thoughts on that is I would be willing to bet if he has extra money these days jingling in his pocket and room to take a deep sigh these days that would be courtesy of Rita Cosby, although everyone is keeping mum about that to be sure something like the O’Quinn settlement from appearing on those pesky gossip sites, like “T”.

©Rose Turner
December 12, 2009
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: Adam Braun, Adam Braun Esq., AG Jerry Brown, Anna Nicole Smith, California AG Jerry Brown, California AG office, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Dr. Conrad Murray, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Perper M. M., Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, Elizabeth McNamara, Feel Good Jerry Brown, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, High Profile Trials, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood Justice, Homicide of Michael Jackson, Honorable Wesley, Howard K Stern, Infotainment, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., Judge Wesley, Michael Jackson, Michael Jackson's Children, news media, Propofol, Rita Cosby, Steve Sadow, Steve Sadow Esq., Superior Court Judge Wesley

Yesterday, December 7, 2009, in the federal court for South Carolina, the Estate for Anna Nicole Smith filed additional documents of why attorney Susan M. Brown should be held in contempt of court, be sanction and added to the suit.

This is the case people I can’t write any opinions of a professional person image in Georgia, however the Estate’s filings say in much more detail then I could express.

So here or the papers without further comment:

December 7, 2009, G. Ben Thompson Request to be Join with the answer filed by Susan M. Brown in Response to the Motion of Contempt and Sanctions.

December 7, 2009 Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Contempt and Sanctions as it concerns Susan M. Brown.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit B filed with the Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Contempt and Sanctions as it concerns Susan M. Brown.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit C filed with the Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Contempt and Sanctions as it concerns Susan M. Brown.

December 7, 2009 Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Complaint; and for the Joiner of Additional Defendants as it concerns Susan M. Brown, attorney, and the Law Office of Susan M. Brown, P. C. to the federal court suit in South Carolina. This contains the belief of Smith’s Estate as to the wrong doing by Brown and how she waived the attorney client privilege as ruled by the North District of Georgia in its ruling regarding Brown’s Motion to Quash Subpoena.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit A Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Complaint.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit B Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Complaint.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit C Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Complaint.

December 7, 2009 Exhibit D Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate’s Reply in Support of the Executor’s, [Howard K. Stern], Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Complaint.

©Rose Turner
December 8, 2009
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, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate Executor, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Federal Court South Carolina, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, Howard K. Stern esq., Howard K. Stern Executor, L. Lin Wood, Law Offices of Susan M. Brwon P. C., Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, North District of Georgia federal court, Rita Cosby, Susan M. Brown, Susan M. Brown Esq., Susan M. Brown Georgia Attorney, Susan M. Brown PC, The O'Quinn Law Firm

There are more papers due out today, November 30, 2009 in South Carolina from G. Ben Thompson on the Motion for Contempt and for Sanctions based of his previous attorney, Susan M. Brown’s acts allegedly on his behalf.

Gathier Thompson III, Melodie Thompson, Gaither’s wife, and Gina Thompson Shelley all have Responses to the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding them as parties in place of the “Doe” names.

As I read over the papers filed by Susan M. Brown last week I found myself amazed as I always seem to be when it comes to the antics and ever changing lawyers from the South Carolina group of players.

In papers filed last week in the South Carolina Federal Court, Ms. Brown says she was on board with the Horizon’s dispute in the Bahamas from day one in 2006. However it appears if that is true that her clients were not straight up about the happenings in the Bahamas. If Brown’s allegations about her clients prove true in court then they appear to have made sure she missed some memos and certainly some major media news articles. If I remember correctly G. Ben Thompson has dropped all claims to Horizons and is now suing the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith (Dannielynn Birkhead), Howard K. Stern, and the lawyers Tracy Ferguson and Michael Scott. The time line for Ms. Brown being kept in the loop and the liaison between her clients and the attorneys in the Bahamas appear not to include Thompson’s attorney in January 2007, Knowles, at the news conference in the picture with this article and there is certainly nothing from Pro Pinder the current attorney in Brown’s filings. Both were attorneys in the Bahamas for Shelley and Thompson after Ferguson and Scott left the employment of the South Carolina family.

This is either dumber than a suitcase full of rocks on the South Carolina crew for not telling their lawyer everything which equals to tying your legal representatives hands and allowing them to be blindsided by the likes of L. Lin Wood. So did Thompson and Shelley throw their attorney under the bus, and did they wiave the attorney-client privilege in what appears to a free for all for Shelley and Thompson AGAIN!!

My guess from reading these filings is that Brown was not in the loop of the Horizons litigation and the property being distributed, and she is fighting for her legal career and thus like any lawyer who has been betrayed will come out fighting now that it appears that Thompson and Shelley has waived the attorney – client privilege which in my opinion was a dumb move on their part..

Here are the filings on November 24, last week and as soon as the filings come out today they will be added to this article.

SOUTH CAROLINA FEDERAL COURT FILINGS NOVEMBER 24, 2009.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Memorandum of law filed in S. C. as a Response and Brown’s Opposition of Estate’s Motion for Sanction and Contempt.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2680.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Exhibit 1 which is the deed filed to put house in Thompson’s name after the law firm withdrew the previous deed signed by Anna Nicole Smith, this is the deed that caused the problems for everyone that is now being sued by each other in the Bahamas.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2681.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Exhibit 2 October 31, 2006 letter from Tracy Ferguson to Anna Nicole Smith to vacate Horizon’s or be prepared for eviction proceedings.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2682.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Exhibit 3 Default Judgment against Wayne Munroe and Anna Nicole Smith dated November 28, 2006 in regards to Horizon’s in the Bahamas.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2683.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Exhibit 4 Default Injunction that barred Ben Thompson or any representative of his to interfere with Anna Nicole Smith living at Horizons dated November 20, 2006 in the Bahamas.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2684.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Exhibit 5 her affidavit dated November 18, 2009 to file with her memorandum of law responding to Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate filing for contempt and sanctions against her and her law firm.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2685.

November 24, 2009 Brown’s Exhibit 6 which is a copy of the Joint Defense and Confidentiality Agreement with Virgie Arthur filed with Brown’s Response to Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate for Motion for Contempt and sanctions. Brown refers to this in her Memorandum of Law and in her affidavit.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2686.

November 24, 2009 Brown’s Exhibit 8 which is an Affidavit from Neil McCabe on behalf of his client dated November 8, 2009 stating that no person representing his client Virgie Arthur or associated with the law firm made any copies of the hard drives or kept anything from the hard drives and the law firm has respected and kept the common defense and confidentiality in tact at all time.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2687.

I did not put up Exhibit 7 since it is a black and white picture of the hard drives that BDK, Virgie Arthur’s expert in the state suit and we already have a color copy of the same 2 hard drives up in this section and I will link it tomorrow when I do an article on all of this.

November 24, 2009 Brown’s Exhibit 9 which is an affidavit from Teresa Lazzaroni dated Nov. 13, 2009 explaining to the Court how her client Susan M. Brown had kept working copies only of the things contained on 3 flash drives turned over to the Estate attorneys for Anna Nicole Smith and how Brown had paid for her hard drive to be destroyed as requested by Lin Wood during her deposition.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2688.

November 24, 2009 Brown’s Exhibit 10 a copy of the letter from Susan M. Brown to Neil McCabe dated September 25, terminating the Joint Defense and Confidentiality Agreement with Virgie Arthur ONLY on G. Ben Thompson not with Ford Shelley.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2689.

November 24, 2009 Court Order for the South Carolina federal Court allowing Susan M. Brown to withdraw as attorney of record for G. Ben Thompson effective the same date.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2690.

November 24, 2009 Court Order for the South Carolina federal Court issued by agreements of the parties to give G. Ben Thompson time to file a Response to the Motion for Contempt and for Sanctions until November 30 pending against him and for Melodie Thompson, Gaither Thompson III, and Gina Thompson Shelley until November 30 to file their Response to being added as parties.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2691.

November 24, 2009 Susan M. Brown’s Response and Objection to Ms. Brown and her law firm being added to the lawsuit in South Carolina and against the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing an Amended Complaint adding her and her firm.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2692.

November 24, 2009 Exhibit 1 which is a letter from Nicole Jennings Wade dated November 29, 2007 verifying that Susan M. Brown did have the hard drives and the only hold up in returning the copies to the Estate was a concern of removal of some of Ford Shelley’s personal files which Ms. Wade assured Ms. Brown the IT department could easily do that once the hard drives were brought to their offices.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2693.

November 24, 2009 Exhibit 2 which is a letter from Nicole Jennings Wade dated September 18, 2008 stating that some of the documents produced by Ford Shelley in response to the Stern – Cosby litigation be returned to their office that Shelley not contact Howard K. Stern again and that they are still waiting for the hard drives to be return so they could meet production requirements for the Estate in the New York pending lawsuit.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2694.

November 24, 2009 Brown Exhibit 4 Copy of Subpoena to Virgie Arthur’s expert BDK dated February 13, 2009 in this case about the hard drives that BDK examined under the Common Defense and Confidentiality between G. Ben Thompson, Ford Shelley and Virgie Arthur.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2695.

I did not put up Exhibit 3 since it is a black and white picture of the hard drives that BDK, Virgie Arthur’s expert in the state suit and we already have a color copy of the same 2 hard drives up in this section and I will link it tomorrow when I do an article on all of this.

©Rose Turner
November 30, 2009
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, BDK computer Forensic, Callendar's Law Firm in the Bahamas, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Don Clark ex-FBI, Elizabeth McNamara, Elizabeth McNamara Esq., Estate of Anna Nicole smith, G Ben Thompson, Gathier Thompson III, Gina Thompson Shelley, High Profile Trials, Horizons in the Bahamas, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Melodie Thompson, Michael Scott of Callendar's Bahamas, Neil McCabe, Nicole Jennings Wade Esq., Pro Pinder Esq. Bahamas, Rita Cosby, Stancil "Ford" Shelley, Susan Brown LLP Atlanta Georgia, Susan M. Brown Esq., Teresa Lazzaroni Esq., The O'Quinn Law Firm, Tracy Ferguson Esq., Tracy Ferguson of Callendar's Bahamas, Virgie Arthur, Wayne Munroe Esq. Bahamas

Today is the beginning of a hectic week. There was a good discussion on Casey Anthony last night with some good links shared by bloggers who have been following this case for over a year. They are new to our site and we appreciate their input and answering the questions that many of have that have not followed that case since day one. Ken has downloaded a ton of paperwork and we think the best way to approach this is via sworn statements/deposition and forensic reports on each one of the family members and then spreading out to the searchers, friends, fellow employees and credibility of witnesses. If any of you want to suggest a different way on how we do this please see the “Contact Us” at the top of each page. I will have an article up about one of them with papers read and ready to discuss if any of you want to join in. Other than all things Anna Nicole Smith covering this case came in second in our latest poll.

We will not forget all things Anna Nicole Smith and those lawsuits. That saga of lawsuits from 2007 and forward is what put Rose Speaks.com on the internet and pulled in a lot of readers who became very familiar with the site and then stopped by to get papers or join in the discussion. We will not forget our promise to you to cover all things Anna Nicole Smith to the conclusion of each lawsuit. The ones left to cover is the South Carolina lawsuit on behalf of the Estate with G. Ben Thompson, Ford Shelley and now Susan M. Brown with papers due to be filed today and Replies by the Estate, Howard K. Stern, and the lawyers handling the Estate who are from Bryan Cave, due December 7. There will be an article up very shortly that will have the papers listed that were filed last week and as the new ones come in today the article will be updated. There is still the ninth circuit court of appeals decision we have been waiting for; the criminal trial in California that should take place in the first quarter of 2010; two cases still pending in Texas for multiple claims. So we are going to see all things Anna Nicole Smith followed to the end, appeals and all.

If you want any of the papers of the cases that have been settled that we have followed so far, (I. E. Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby) please download those papers this week, this coming weekend they will be removed from the server to make the newest documents load faster.

If you look at the top of the blog page you will see a couple of new links, “About Us”, and a href=”http://www.rosespeaks.com/rose-blog/contact-us/” target=”_blank”>“Contact Us”, we hope that will make it a tad simpler for those who want to know more about the site or an easier way to contact us.

Now for some input, we are looking for a calendar plug-in to keep up with events, if we find that we want some input from all of you.

1. Should we dissolve the main part of the site and have the blog as the main part of the site (www.rosespeaks.com) would become the blog main page. If we do that we can add a link on the side or at the top of the blog for Downloads and have them listed here and not having to put in a code like you all do now to download documents and you would not be going back and forth between the blog and where the documents are stored.

2. If we do that, then the blog and the public forum will be the entire site and would allow us to interact with all of you through polls, papers easier to access etc. Please give us your input if we do this then there will be some work to change over that could take a several weekends to complete (I. E. reloading and coding documents to be downloaded from the blog, moving calendar events a redirect page for a few weeks to get people to the blog that are expecting to go to the main page or the blog etc.). There would be some confusion in this for all of you for a while. However if that will make the site more user friendly we are opened to your ideas and welcome them.

3. Do you want us to leave the forum part of the site up for personal conversations, a more free for all on the cases, etc.? If you want that kept as part of Rose Speaks.com what would you like to see there, members only or anyone can post as they do now on the blog?

We will have three articles up today, four counting this one. The others will be on the South Carolina case, a new article by John J. Nazarian, and a new discussion on Casey Anthony.

We always welcome your ideas and suggestions as to how you want Rose Speaks.com set up to make it the easiest for all our readers and posters.

If you have not read our TOS/Terms of Use and Privacy Policy please do, there is a link to both at the end of each article. As Roxanne said over the weekend we are actually a site that follows both for your right to privacy and not have a free for all of attacking other posters.

As always thank you for flying Rose Speaks.com

©Rose Turner
November 30, 2009
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, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Desperateexes.com, Don Clark ex-FBI, Elizabeth McNamara, G Ben Thompson, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Rita Cosby, Rose Speaks, Rose Turner, rosespeaks.com, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

In just a simple statement on the Court’s Docket dated November 20, 2009 the suit of Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby for defamation pending in the Southern District of the Federal Court of New York is over, and we will never know the truth now. Elizabeth McNamara filed the paperwork late today with the Court on behalf of both parties. The Stipulation of the settlement has not been filed yet. Therefore we don’t know if it will Stipulate that the settlement NOT be sealed; if Rita Cosby will have to do a public apology; if the books will be pulled from bookstores or if they will remain forever to haunt Howard K. Stern. From what I have read about Elizabeth McNamara if she thought Rita Cosby had a chance she would carry this all of the way to trial. Cosby has to pay for all of the work McNamara and her team has done over the last 2+ years out of Cosby’s pocket or Hachette Book’s insurance. I am sure that Lin Wood was on a contingent basis and will get his 40 – 50% plus costs off of the top and we will never know what Stern received, unless the Stipulation of the settlement is to be filed openly we will never know what Howard K. Stern walks away with.

STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties and/or their respective counsel(s) that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice against the defendant(s) Rita Cosby and without costs to either party pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Document filed by Rita Cosby

November 20, 2009 Dismissal of lawsuit with prejudiced in the Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby defamation suit, additional stipulations of the settlement will be filed later, both parties to pay their own costs.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/downloads/misc/11-20-2009-Cosby-Dismiss-Prejudice.pdf.

The Court signed off on the settlement Order and closed the case on November 25, 2009.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/downloads/misc/11-25-2009-Cosby-Order-dismissed.pdf.

This followed the Court Opinion dated August 12, 2009 that dismissed Hachette from the lawsuit but allowed Stern to have a jury trial on the allegations involving Rita Cosby committing slander/libel.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/downloads/misc/8-12-09-Court-Order-Jury-Trial-stern-cosby.pdf,

©Rose Turner
November 20, 2009
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, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Elizabeth McNamara, Hachette Books, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Rita Cosby, Virgie Arthur