Just five days before a trial was to begin in which long time companion Darla Lexington was suing the Estate of John O’Quinn. It appears everyone was happy after a four hour mediation meeting between the attorneys resulted in a sealed out of court settlement.

The Texas Lawyer announced the settlement late today.

“This afternoon, Darla Lexington, the longtime companion of prominent Houston plaintiffs lawyer John O’Quinn, settled her dispute with O’Quinn’s estate and the John M. O’Quinn Foundation over assets from his estate. O’Quinn died in an automobile accident in October 2009.

…Lexington sought court orders to force the executor of O’Quinn’s estate to return property she alleged belongs to her because of her common-law marriage to O’Quinn and because she received the property as gifts.

The estate and the foundation, which is the sole beneficiary of the estate in O’Quinn’s will, claimed that Lexington was not entitled to the property because O’Quinn specified in his will that he was not married and he left his estate to the foundation.

…Jimmy Williamson, a partner in Williamson & Rusnak in Houston who represents Lexington, says the terms provide for Lexington and her security. Kathy Patrick, a partner in Gibbs & Bruns in Houston who represents the foundation, could not be reached for immediate comment.

“I’m very happy we came to a mutual agreement and the foundation can go on and honor John,” Lexington said this afternoon.

Executor Gerald Treece, an assistant dean and professor at South Texas College of Law in Houston, said he is pleased with the settlement. “As the person John selected as the executor, I’m very happy to do what was in John’s best interest and also please Darla and the foundation,” Treece said.

The settlement averted what lawyers expected to be a five-week trial beginning on Jan. 9 in Judge Mike Wood’s Probate Court No. 2 in Houston.”

One thing I noticed was the trial was to start in Judge Mike Wood’s Probate Court, the same court that Anna Nicole Smith took on Pierce Marshall!

In other news in Houston Texas today, Jerry Eversole received a break from U.S. District Judge David Hittner who sentenced, the former Precinct 4 commissioner to 3 years probation in a case that could have landed him in federal prison for up to three years and cost him up to $100,000 in fines.

KUHF reported today that Eversole was accused of accepting bribes from developer Michael Surface. The sentence is for lying to a federal investigator about money and lavish gifts the government alleges Eversole received from Surface, a longtime friend, in return for lucrative county contracts.

“Eversole had been charged with conspiracy, accepting a bribe, and making false statements on tax returns in 2003 and 2004. All those charges were dismissed.

…Eversole refused comment on his sentencing and instead, let his attorney Rusty Hardin speak on his behalf. Hardin says he was ready to play hardball with government prosecutors, if need be.

“The judge read a provision in his sentencing memo, in which we took exception, and I said that I thought it was unseemly for the government to seek to have him punished for the counts they chose to dismiss, and that they could have asked for a trial on. We’d let a jury decide and they chose not to do that. And then they wanted the judge to punish him for something they didn’t have the courage to try.”

We encourage all of you to join other posters to discuss all of the cases we cover. Diamond Girl runs the community part of the site and remember discuss the evidence don’t attack other posters. If you read a post that upsets you just scroll past that comment http://community.rosespeaks.com/.

Visit our Download Section and pick up all of the documents related to any cases we follow; we put up papers throughout the trials, and then leave them up as part of the history of the cases we cover.

Follow Us On and on Twitter and see who Rose Speaks is following.

©Rose Turner
January 4, 2012
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. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.

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

Tags: accepting a bribe, accepting bribes, Anna Nicole Smith, Celebrity Trials, common-law marriage to John O'Quinn, conspiracy, Darla Lexington, developer Michael Surface, Estate of John O'Quinn, Executor Gerald Treece, Gerald Treece, Gerald Treece assistant dean and professor, Gerald Treece Esq, Gibbs & Bruns, High Profile Trials, Houston, Houston Texas, Jerry Eversole, Jimmy Williamson, John M. O'Quinn, John M. O'Quinn Foundation, John O'Quinn, John O'Quinn died in October 2009, John O'Quinn's Estate, Judge Mike Wood, Judge Mike Wood’s Probate Court No. 2, Kathy Patrick, KUHF, lying to a federal investigator about money and lavish gifts, making false statements on tax returns in 2003 and 2004, mediation, Michael Surface, Pierce Marshall, return for lucrative county contracts, Rose Speaks Community, Rose Speaks Face Book, Rose Speaks Twitter, Rusty Hardin, Rusty Hardin Esq., sealed out of court settlement, sole beneficiary of the estate in O’Quinn’s will, South Texas College of Law, T. Gerald Treece, Texas, The O'Quinn Law Firm, The Texas Lawyer, U.S. District Judge David Hittner, Williamson & Rusnak

What started out as the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith vs. Ford Shelley, Gina Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson and Melanie Thompson, or known as the Shelley and Thompson Clan of South Carolina. The people who broke into Horizons in the Bahamas and then allegedly sold a lot of tapes and pictures to TMZ (remember the Methadone refrigerator picture), Splash (including the tasteless picture of Daniel Smith in his casket), tons of videos to Fox News including On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera Live, and the list goes on and on. Ford was one of the first to holler, Howard K. Stern did something to Daniel and Anna Nicole Smith, and the first at the trial to say Howard never hurt Anna……… so much for credibility. The question is though where is the money that all of that sold for????

Then enters what has become the big fish, Susan M. Brown Esq., Georgia Attorney and the Susan M. Brown Law Office, did this poor woman get left holding the bag and with the O’Quinn law firm dissolved there is no one to hand it off too. Kind of like playing musical chairs and the one left standing alone when the music stops, that would be Susan M. Brown.

Brown has tap danced for two years with the same song just different steps until she finally had a Northern District of Georgia Federal Court say she had waived the attorney client privilege under the crime fraud act…… NOT good for a lawyer’s resume, not to mention the State Bar of Georgia.

Any Objections to Susan M. Brown’s current lawyers, Joseph C. Wilson IV. and Carl E. Pierce II of Pierce, Herns, Sloan & McLeod LLC, has filed to withdraw as counsel for “the Brown Defendants”, stating it would not cause any prejudice because “the discovery concerning the Brown Defendants has not begun”. Do what??? The court ruled a long time ago that because Brown has been present for all of those depositions there would not be that much extra to tidy up the suit and have it ready for trial.

However the big WHAM in the March 2, 2011 filings is asking and filing the Motion to Withdraw with the grounds set out to substantiate the withdrawing should be in a Memorandum in Support filed UNDER SEAL “Counsel is not aware of any other means to communicate the grounds for withdrawal that would protect the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship and avoid undue prejudice to the Brown Defendants.”

However the case they quote as outweighing the right of the public right to know (I. E. the News media) on its own raises red flags of the potential seriousness of these actions. In the Knight case it states; “we explained that, while a district court has a supervisory power over its own records and may, in its discretion, seal documents if the public’s right of access is outweighed by competing interests, the presumption in such cases favors public access. The public’s right of access to judicial records and documents may be abrogated ONLY IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Accordingly before a district court may seal any court documents, we held that it must 1) provide public notice of the request to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object. (That date was March 21, 2011 per the South Carolina Federal Court’s Docket). 2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and 3) provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.”

The Motion ends that “Counsel will submit the Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Withdraw to the Court for the Court’s in camera review and shall not file same until further notice from the Court.

Well folks I don’t think there will be any jury selection starting tomorrow, and as of midnight there has been no objections or request for a hearing on the filing being done under seal…

So what do you think Susan M. Brown needs to be protective from “avoid undue prejudice”?

As soon as we have the Court’s decision, and new dates for jury selection will post it, it is noticeable that no lawyer has filed to just transfer the case to them, as new attorney of record, things that make you go Mmmmmmmmmmmm.

HERE ARE THE THREE LATEST FILINGS:

March 2, 2011 Susan M Brown\'s Answer First Amended Complaint (195)
March 2 , 2011 Motion by Counsel for Susand M. Brown and The Brown Law Firm to Wtithdraw (304)
March 2, 2100 Counsel for Susan M Brwon Motion to File Under Seal Memorandum Reason Withdraw as Counsel (296)

Follow Us On Face Book at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001254987261 and on Twitter at http://twitter.com/RoseSpeaks and see who Rose Speaks is following.

Be sure to participate in our COMMUNITY , get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the community where you can discuss things about the cases in a debate area of the site.

Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following:

We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL. If you would like to do some articles for Rose Speaks.com send us that information and we will give you our rules for guest writers.

©Rose Turner
March 22, 2011
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. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.

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

Tags: allegedly sold a lot of tapes and pictures, allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith Estate, attorney-client privilege, avoid undue prejudice, avoid undue prejudice to the Brown Defendants, before a district court may seal any court documents, Beverly Hills, Carl E. Pierce II, Carl E. Pierce II Esq., Celebrity Trials, confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship, consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, Court's in camera review, crime fraud act, Daniel Smith, Daniel Smith in his casket, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, favors public access, filed under seal, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson and Melanie Thompson, Georgia Attorney, Geralda Rivera Live, Geraldo - Live, Geraldo At Large, Geraldo FOX News, Geraldo Rivera Live, Gina Shelley, Greta Van Sustern Fox News, High Profile Trials, Hollywood, Horizons in the Bahamas, Howard K Stern, John O'Quinn, Joseph C Wilson IV Esq., Joseph C. Wilson IV, L. Lin Wood, Law Offices of Susan M. Brown, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, March 2 2011 filings, March 21 2011, may be abrogated, Memorandum in Support, Memorandum in Support filed under seal, Methadone refrigerator picture, Methodone refrigerator picture, Motion to Withdraw, Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, Neil McCabe, Northern District of Georgia Federal Court, On The Record with Greta Van Susteren, O’Quinn law firm dissolved, Pierce Herns Sloan & McLeod LLC, playing musical chairs, potential seriousness of these actions, presumption in such cases favors public access, protect the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship, provide factual findings, provide public notice of the request to seal, provide specific reasons, provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives, public's right of access, public's right of access is outweighed by competing interests, public's right of access may be abrogated only in unusual circumstances, public's right of access to judicial documents, public's right of access to judicial records, public's right of access to judicial records and documents, raises red flag, Shelley and Thompson Clan of South Carolina, South Carolina Federal Court's Docket, Splash, State Bar of Georgia, supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives, Susan M. Brown, Susan M. Brown Esq., The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, undue prefudice, Virgie Arthur, waived the attorney client privilege, waived the attorney client privilege under the crime fraud act, withdraw as counsel for "the Brown Defendants

When I look at this picture of Anna Nicole Smith, her son, Daniel Wayne Smith and her lover lawyer Howard K. Stern entering the U. S. Supreme Court five years ago, February 2006, little did anyone know what would happen during the next five years.

Anna Nicole Smith was pregnant with her daughter Dannielynn and the world looked bright, especially in June 2006 when the U. S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Smith had a right to have her appeal sent back to the lower court to decide if she was entitled to any of her deceased husband’s, J. Howard Marshall’s Estate valued over one billion dollars.

Now five years later, once again Howard K. Stern returns to the Supreme Court to hear arguments on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 to address whether Smith’s Estate is entitled to part of the Estate of a deceased husband’s estates which has now been tangled up in court for 15 years. Howard K. Stern returns alone, unless Dannielynn’s father decides to attend with Stern, to see if Smith’s lone heir gets money.

In the last five years, Pierce Marshall has died, Daniel Wayne Smith has died, Anna Nicole Smith has died and John M. O’Quinn died in an accident. Howard K. Stern faced potential career ending charges and a trial to funneling drugs to a “known addict”. Stern was cleared of that on January 6, 2011 by Los Angeles Judge Robert Perry of all charges and his life was given back intact for him to continue to practice law.

On January 10, 2011 Stern filed the Reply to Elaine Marshall’s, Pierce Marshall’s widow, Response dated December 13, 2010, to the Estate of Smith’s Writ of Certiorari filed November 12 2010 with the Supreme Court once again ruling they will hear oral arguments this coming Tuesday and again decide this mega million dollar estate. Any decision by the U. S. Supreme Court will be issued no later than the last Monday of June 2011.

You have to feel a tad sad for Stern to be returning five years later, minus so many important people in his life including the love of his life Smith and her son Daniel.

The attorneys for the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith consists of; Philip W. Boesch Jr. Esq., The Boesch Law Group, Bruce S. Ross, Vivian L. Thoreen, Holland & Knight LLP, Kent L. Richland, Alan Diamond, Edward L. Xanders, Greines, Martin, Stein & Richaland LLP

The attorneys for Elaine Marshall consists of; Roy T. Englert Jr., of Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untreiner and Sauber LLP as well as G. Erin Brunstad Jr., Collin O’Connor Undell, and Matthew J. Delude of Deschert LLP

There has been seven Ameicus Briefs filed by interested groups including the U. S. government, some in favor of Smith’s Estate and some in favor of Marshall.

Here is a list of the other papers filed so you can become acquainted with them to discuss prior to the hearing this Tuesday. The U. S. Supreme Court has three cases it is hearing oral arguments on with this one listed as the last of the three to be heard that day.

November 15, 2010 Ameicus Brief by Legal Professors in Support of Howard K. Stern. The legal professors and lawyers listed are Richard AAron, Laura Bartell, Jagdeep S. Bhandari, Susan Block-Lieb, Robert D’Agostino, Jackie Gardina, Ingrid Hillinger, George W. Kuney, Lois Lupica, C. Scott Pryor, Keith Sharfman, Michael D. Sousa, and Robert M. Ziman.

November 19, 2010 Amercus Brief by. the Bankruptcy Trustees in Support of Howard K. Stern.

November 2010 Ameicus Brief by the United States of America in Support of Howard K. Stern..

December 20, 2010 Ameicus Brief by the National Black Chamber of Commerce in Support of Elaine Marshall.

December 20, 2010 Ameicus Brief by by Washington Legal Foundation in Support of Elaine Marshall.

December 2010 Ameicus Brief by the Center Rule of Law in Support of Elaine Marshall.

December 2010 Ameicus Brief by Legal Professors in Support of Elaine Marshall. The law professors are; S. Todd Brown, G. Marcus Cole, Ronald D. Rotunda, and Todd J. Zywicki

The Three Points the U. S. Supreme Court has decided to hear oral arguments and issue an Opinion on three questions asked to be addressed by Smith’s Estate:

1. Whether the Ninth Circuit opinion, which renders §157(b)(2)(C) surplusage in
light of §157(b)(2)(B), contravenes Congress’ intent in enacting §157(b)(2)(C).

2. Whether Congress may, under Articles I and III, constitutionally authorize core
jurisdiction over debtors’ compulsory counterclaims to proofs of claim.

3. Whether the Ninth Circuit misapplied Marathon and Katchen and contravened this Court’s post-Marathon precedent, creating a circuit split in the process, by holding that Congress cannot constitutionally authorize non-Article III bankruptcy judges to enter final judgment on all compulsory counterclaims to proofs of claim.

I wonder if the Marshall money, like the Hope Diamond is going to be surrounded of the mystic of tragedy attached to it, what do you think?

Follow Us On Face Book at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001254987261 and on Twitter at http://twitter.com/RoseSpeaks

Be sure to participate in our COMMUNITY , get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the community where you can discuss things about the cases in a debate area of the site.

Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following:

We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL. If you would like to be a guest writer, please send up what you propose to write about via the Contact Us link as well.

©Rose Turner
January 15, 2011
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. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.

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

Tags: Alan Diamond, Ameicus Briefs, Amicus Curiae, Amicus Curiae Brief, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith and Howard K. Stern, Anna Nicole Smith was pregnant, Bankruptcy Trustees, Beverly Hills, Bruce S. Ross, C. Scott Pryor, Celebrity Trials, Center Rule of Law, compulsory counterclaims, core bankruptcy function, core jurisdiction, Daniel Smith, Daniel Wayne Smith, Dannielynn, de novo review, deceased husband, E. Pierce Marshall, Edward L. Xanders, Edwin Hunter Esq. crime-fraud exception, Elaine Marshall, Englert, Famed Berverly Hills P. I. John J. Nazarian, funneling drugs to a “known addict”, G. Marcus Cole, George W. Kuney, Greines Martin Stein & Richaland LLP, High Profile Trials, Holland & Knight LLP, Hollywood, Howard K Stern, Ingrid Hillinger, J. Howard Marshall, J. Howard Marshall’s Estate, Jackie Gardina, Jagdeep S. Bhandari, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., John O'Quinn, Judge Robert Perry, Keith Sharfman, Kent L. Richland, last Monday of June 2011, Laura Bartell, Legal Professors support Marshall, Legal Professors support Stern, Lois Lupica, Los Angeles, Los Angeles Judge Robert Perry, mega million dollar estate, Michael D. Sousa, National Black Chamber of Commerce, Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal, Ninth Circuit opinion, non-Article III bankruptcy judges, of Robbins, Orseck, Philip W. Boesch Jr. Esq., Pierce Marshall, Richard AAron, Robbins Russell Englert Orseck Untreiner and Sauber LLP, Robert D'Agostino, Robert M. Ziman, Ronald D. Rotunda, Roy T. Englert Jr., Russell, S. Todd Brown, Susan Block-Lieb, The Boesch Law Group, The Center Rule of Law, The Hope Diamond, The Hope Diamond Curse, The Marshall Money Curse, Todd J. Zywicki, U. S. Supreme Court, United States of America, Untreiner and Sauber LLP, Virgie Arthur, Vivian L. Thoreen, Washington Legal Foundation, Writ of Certiorari

The Houston Chronicle announced that a group of Texas history buffs has purchased a vacant, partially submerged 19-acre tract near the San Jacinto Monument from the estate of the late Houston lawyer John M. O’Quinn with plans to restore it to its 1836 appearance and open it to the public as an extension of the battleground complex.

The $625,000 sale was announced this week by O’Quinn’s estate and the Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground.
The group announced it’s intention to raise the $625,000 last January and said they had until June 1, 2010 to come up with the $625,000. It appears they were close enough that the Estate of O’Quinn held the property until the purchase was complete earlier this month.

The San Jacinto battlefield is a monument to the battle that secured Texas as it’s own republic from Mexico. It is not as well known throughout the U. S as the Alamo is but it is sacred ground to Texans.

The Friends of San Jacinto president Jan DeVault said work at the site likely will begin next year as an archaeological team surveys 11 acres of the site covered with shallow water in search of a Civil War-era naval compound.

The Houston Chronicle goes on to say that although the hardest fighting in the April 21, 1826, clash between Sam Houston’s 900 Texan troops and Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna’s 1,400 soldiers occurred near the San Jacinto Monument, the newly acquired property still holds historical significance, DeVault said. “We consider it sacred ground,” she said.

In 1836, the property was transected by the Harrisburg-Lynchburg Road, and in the days leading to the final battle of the Texas Revolution, was crossed by both Mexican and Texan troops. In the weeks before the battle about 5,000 Texas settlers fleeing the Mexican advance crossed the property.

After the battle, the site was occupied by a sawmill and a small community called San Jacinto. During the Civil War, the site was home to a Confederate armory, barracks and shipyard.

The Confederate complex was covered by water as the land subsided. DeVault said archaeologists will survey the area with side-scan sonar and “make efforts to retrieve whatever we find.”

DeVault said it is significant that work at the site will begin in 2011, the battle’s 175th anniversary. “We are giving the site to the people of the state of Texas as a birthday present,” she said.

Gerald Treece, executor of the O’Quinn estate, said he was “overjoyed that we could see that this historically significant property went to the Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground, who will not only preserve it, but work to recapture the way the land looked and felt when Sam Houston marched the Texas army across it to go to battle for the state’s independence.”

If you visit us here in Texas I would say this monument is a must see and that most visitors to vist the Alamo in San Antonia Texas are disappointed. The Alamo is in downtown San Antonia and only a chapel is left with some history and a souvenir store within it’s walls. The San Jacinto sacred ground, will give more of a feel for the true history of Texas.

We will have an article up later today that recaps the testimony in California. There is not testimony or court today or tomorrow. Testimony will resume on Monday with more of the Thompson and Shelley family testifying.

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
August 26, 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. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.

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

Tags: 175th anniversary, April 1836, archaeologists, Civil War, Civil War-era, Confederate armory, Estate of John O'Quinn, Executor Gerald Treece, final battle of the Texas Revolution, Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground., Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna', Gerald Treece, Harrisburg-Lynchburg Road, Houston, Jan DeVault, John M. O'Quinn, John O'Quinn, John O'Quinn's Executor Gerald Treece, Mexico, Republic of Texas, sacred ground, Sam Houston, San Antonia, San Antonia Texas, San Jacinto, San Jacinto battlefield is a monument, South West Law School, South West School of Law, souvenir store, Texas, Texas Revolution, The Alamo, The Houston Chronicle, The O'Quinn Law Firm

The Houston Chronicle is carrying the story by Mary Flood that famed billionaire attorney John O’Quinn’s live in companion for over 10 years has asked to be named as O’Quinn’s common-law-wife in order to get part of O’Quinn’s Estate.

Darla Lexington’s attorney has approached the Executor of O’Quinn’s Estate, Gerald Treece to ask that she be named as O’Quinn’s common-law wife and thus that would make Lexington entitled to part of O’Quinn’s billion dollar Estate.

However as the copy carried here at Rose Speaks.com stated, John O’Quinn’s will was written in the summer of 2008 well into his relationship with Lexington and left her nothing and further stated that O’Quinn was “single” and that all of his money and property was to go to his charitable foundation. .

Jimmy Williamson is the attorney for Lexington, Houston Chronicle Article states that he said; “They are trying to handle this claim diplomatically and have filed no legal papers yet. There’s no question that Darla and John loved each other and John introduced Darla as his wife on many, many occasions.”

Lexington who lived with O’Quinn in a million dollar plus River Oaks Estate in Houston Texas moved out so it could be sold. “Selling the home was painful for Darla. It had been her home for 10 years,” Williamson said in the article.

Dale Jefferson, a lawyer for the estate, told the paper that; “They are also selling many of O’Quinn’s beloved antique cars and his ranch as well. The estate executor, and the foundation are completely aligned in thinking O’Quinn was single and the money goes to the foundation.

During O’Quinn’s life, Lexington headed the nonprofit corporation, Classy Classic Cars Ltd., which oversaw O’Qunn’s massive antique care collection numbering close to 1,000 vintage cars at one time. Lexington and O’Quinn had plans to establish a car museum before his sudden death in October 2009.

Wonder who else might want a piece of this billion dollar estate, guess time will only tell that?

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
April 21, 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: billion dollar Estate, Dale Jefferson Esq., Darla Lexington, Executor Gerald Treece, Gerald Treece, High Profile Trials, Houston Chronicle, Jimmy Williamson Esq., John O'Quinn, John O'Quinn's Estate, John O'Quinn's Executor Gerald Treece, John O'Quinn's Foundation, John O'Quinn's Will, MARY FLOOD, million dollar plus River Oaks house, ommon-law wife, reporter Mary Flood, River Oaks Houston Texas, The O'Quinn Law Firm

John O’Quinn has been as complex in death as he was in life. There are no simple answers or simple liquidation of his assets and as a lawyer bigger then Texas itself that is how it should be.

The name of O’Quinn will continue to circle for I predict five to seven years. Mr. Neil McCabe of the O’Quinn Law Firm told me on the record a few months ago, that the Law Firm had just signed a new five year lease. John O’Quinn was not a stupid man, in fact all who knew him or went up against him in court are in agreement he was one of the smartest litigators as Texas will ever see again, or the U. S. for that matter.

O’Quinn’s tragic death in October 2009 has created gossip, a rush to read his Will, and attempting to get a quote from the Executor of the Estate or the board members of the John M. O’Quinn Foundation. However the Executor or Board of Directors have given few quotes on the record which leaves us scrambling for answers, especially for those of us in adversarial roles in lawsuits with the O’Quinn Law Firm.

The Estate is being handled by a life long friend, T. Gerald Treece. Mr. Treece was of counsel to the O’Quinn Law Firm before O’Quinn’s death. Treece wrote the formal obituary and gave a moving eulogy by all accounts at the funeral of O’Quinn. Mr. Treece also is an assistant dean at Southwest College of Law, counsel to the president of the law school, and instructor at the law school as time permits.

Upon John O’Quinn’s death everything concerning the law firm was moved into the O’Quinn Law Firm Trust with three co-trustees at the helm, Mr. Treece, C. David Towery and David L. Griffis. They are to make all decisions for the slow dissolution of the firm, and those of us who live in Texas know full well that a civil suit in Texas can last from five to seven years. Mr. O’Quinn would not have those pending suits with money due him hanging in the wind so to say. Just like the Overstock.com lawsuit he was heading to a mediation meeting with a fellow lawyer on the day of his death, there are many pending lawsuits that owe Mr. O’Quinn’s Estate, O’Quinn’s share of the winnings, or the debts if that is the case.

The complex John O’Quinn remains just that from a loving Super Bowl Sunday to his prize cars owned by Classy Classic Cars LTD, which Darla Lexington, Mr. O’Quinn’s long time partner and described as the love of his life is president.

This week before the Super Bowl, Dexter Manley, nicknamed the “Secretary of Defense”, has been given the showy championship ring he won as a Washington Redskin on Jan. 30, 1983, back from the Executor of O’Quinn’s Estate on behalf of the Estate. In an interview with Houston Chronicle, Mary Flood, Treece shared that O’Quinn had given him the super bowl ring with explicit instruction on how and when to return the ring.

Manley had an illustrious eleven year football career, mainly with the Washington Redskins before being banned from the game permanently for the use of Crack Cocaine.

“During one of many relapses in 1998, Manley walked into a pawn shop in the southwest part of Houston. Low on cash, on the verge of eviction, he took the first of two Super Bowl rings he won in Washington and gave it to the man behind the counter; he walked out with $5,000, which soon disappeared in puffs of white smoke.” John O’Quinn heard the story and without Manley knowing it went to the same “pawn shop about a year later to find the ring had not yet been sold he handed over the $15,000 resale value in cash”.

Manley continued his descent into addiction and O’Quinn held on to the ring, saying when Manley got sobered he could have the ring back and so it went for ten years. When asked Manley would say, “See, in order to know your history, you got to know yourself. I knew myself enough to know someone else needed to have that ring then.”

Per the Washington Post interview with Manley’s wife she said; “John kept telling him he gave it to me on the plane that day and finally I said to him, ‘Dexter, you know John has it, I said, He’s not giving it back to you yet because he doesn’t believe you’re whole. He still thinks the ring needs to be safe. …At one point O’Quinn told Lydia, during one of Dexter’s relapses, ‘Don’t stop talking to him. He might not hear everything. But he hears something. We all hear something.’ What few people knew at the time is that O’Quinn was fighting his own addiction with alcohol one he beat, so he knew of the demons of addiction and “the destructive things the disease make you do. …He would only give the ring back if Dexter was now sober and healthy,” said Lydia, whose husband has not had a relapse since June 16, 2006. “That was real important. He, [Treece], asked me that about four times. …And you know what? He, [O’Quinn] fulfilled his purpose. He kept that ring safe. He kept that ring safe until Dexter could keep himself safe.”

The interview went on to say that Manley; “About a week after his death Dexter called Treece, the executor of O’Quinn’s estate, to share condolences. ‘The first time I smiled after John’s death, Treece recalled. Dexter was so much like John — a golden heart who would do anything for anybody.”

Near the end of the conversation Manley asked if Treece knew where his super bowl ring was and it was then that Treece said he had instructions from O’Quinn about the ring and he needed to talk to Lydia, Manley’s wife. Lydia Manley picked the ring up on Wednesday night at the law school office of Treece. While looking at it she mused; that “she liked that it was a little tarnished, but still just as valuable. It’s not all shiny right now, it’s just as it should be. It’s got a little wear on it.”

So today as we all watch the Super Bowl a sober Dexter Manley will have his super bowl ring with him; “This day is bittersweet,” said Lydia Manley, happy her husband deserves the ring back after being sober since 2006 but sad O’Quinn isn’t around to see that day.” Manley said of getting his ring back, “I can be trusted now; I’m safe, it, [the ring], may be best in my wife’s capable hands.”

I will be looking at the crowd Sunday afternoon here in my home as millions of us tune in for the Super Bowl and thinking about that tarnished ring, probably shined and sparkling as it should be by this day. It is 18-carat solid gold, heavy and gaudy. On its crown is a diamond-encrusted football with burgundy backing. One side is engraved with the Roman numerals XVII and the words “Super Bowl.” Under the words “Hail to the Redskins” are the Lombardi Trophy and the Capitol. Engraved on the other side is “MANLEY,” which sits above a Redskins helmet and his No. 72.

I believe a part of O’Quinn will be there with Manley sharing the common love both men had for the other and both understanding the tough road to sobriety. A very complex man, Mr. O’Quinn was.

Part two will be put up after the Super Bowl and will deal with the rumor car sales and what happens now with the Estate of John M. O’Quinn.

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
February 7, 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: C. David Towery, Celebrity Trials, Classy Classic Cars LTD, Crack Cocaine, Darla Lexington, David L.Griffis, Dexter Manley, Dexter Manley #72, diamond-encrusted football, Executor of John M. O'Quinn's Will, Executor of O’Quinn’s Estate, Hail to the Redskins, High Profile Trials, Houston Chronicle, John M. O'Quinn's Will, John M. O’Quinn Foundation, John O'Quinn, John O’Quinn’s death, Lombardi Trophy, Lydia Manley, MANLEY, MARY FLOOD, MARY FLOOD - HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Mr. Treece, Neil McCabe, Overstock.com, Overstock.com lawsuit, Overstock.com litigation, pawn shop, Redskins helmet, rumor car sales, Secretary of Defense - football, Southwest College of Law, southwest part of Houston, Super Bowl, super bowl ring, Super Bowl Sunday, Super Bowl XVII, T. Gerald Treece, The John O'Quinn Law Firm, The O'Quinn Law Firm, The O'Quinn Law Firm Trust, Washington Post, Washington Redskins

Ken and I would like to wish each of you a very Happy, safe and healthy New Year.

If you are going out tonight please be safe, we have had a lot of wrecks here during the holiday season so be safe.

Remember that Ken will be doing updates on both the blog and forums this weekend however neither of them will be down at the same time, his work will be on Saturday night, January 2.

We have asked that all of you think about what are the best cases we have covered this year. What are the saddest cases we have covered? What are the most interesting to you? What do you want to see in 2010 covered? You can list up to five cases if you remember that many.

For me it is for the best cases, a toss up, I am not sure if I would list the “best cases” as those who settled in a way I was pleased. So many of the people we have covered in 2009 have been heartbreaking. The most interesting one was the Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby, there were so many publicly available depositions and filings in this case that for someone who loves legal papers this is the most interesting one.

The saddest cases we have covered would be the Casey Anthony case. The most frustrating one was the Roland Carnaby alleged CIA case. The federal court granted the motions for Summary Judgment so we will never learn what really happened in that wreck, why the computer went to the Secret Service, and of course this will continue to feed the conspiracy nuts. The death of John O’Quinn was another tragedy. I remember in 2007 I said that we were witnessing two titans in the legal field in the numerous Anna Nicole Smith cases and I predicted one would go on to be thought of as the top lawyer with the most recognizable name and one would retire. I was so wrong about that I still think of the people who loved this man, yes there were many, facing this first holiday season without their colleague and friend. This is followed by the Michael Jackson tragic death and the beginning of family members fighting to control his Estate. For some reason that always happens and it must be very heartbreaking for all three of Jackson’s children. The two most bizarre cases we followed in 2009 was the Lori Drew federal criminal case of violating the TOS of MySpace and of course we can’t leave out Michelle Bruan, the Hollywood Madam

For 2010, we will finish all things Anna Nicole Smith as we have always promised, although I have to admit I am really worn down on these cases and will be glad when the last one to wind up hopefully by the summer of 2010. We will cover the Casey and Caylee Anthony case in 2010, as I have said many times I do not like to cover missing or murdered children because it is heart wrenching to me. However as the documents become public in this case with three trials coming up in 2010, I feel this is a have to case to follow. I also think Michael Jackson’s death, indictments, trials and continued fighting over his Estate will be at the forefront of our coverage. Now that Roman Polanski’s appeal to drop his case in the California Appeals Court has been denied we will follow whether the U. S. is successful in expediting Polinski and if so we will cover that trial.

Please share the cases you feel were the best, most interesting and saddest in 2009. Share with us the cases you want us to cover in 2010. You can post your thoughts with us here on the blog or in the members’ only forums.

There have been so many personal tragedies for so many of you in 2009, we wish you healing and only the good memories of those of you who have lost someone remain in 2010. May each of you find peace in the New Year.

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.

Have a Happy and Blessed New Year.
Ken and Rose Turner

December 31, 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, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Celebrity Trials, Dr. Conrad Murray, Estate of Michael Jackson, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, George and Cindy Anthony, High Profile Trials, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Hollywood Madam, Howard K Stern, John O'Quinn, Ken and Rose Turner, Ken Turner, Lori Drew, Michael Jacdon's Will, Michael Jackson, Michelle Braun, Rita Cosby, Roland "Tony" Carnaby, Roland Carnaby, Rose Speaks, Rose Turner, rosespeaks.com, Susan Carnaby