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

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

Thanks for the emails of concern, I appreciate them, actually I have begun to trace my family from the U. K. via the May Flower in 1620 and forward… it is additive… however have no fear I am back and will be putting up a new article at least every other day while we catch up on all of the cases we are covering not just all things Anna Nicole Smith, Howard K. Stern etc.

NEWEST PAPERS IN TEXAS CASE:

June 1, 2010 Court Order with new Docket Control Dates, as well I expect this all to change again because of the pending hearings, Motions, depositions, etc. I just don’t see it being done by August 17, 2010 regarding Discovery let alone the Writs decided by the First Court of Appeals and the Howard K. Stern Motions set for hearing on August 6, 2010. I see the Court once again changing all of the dates.

June 8, 2010 Virgie Arthur’s Notice of hearing on all Motions pending against Howard K. Stern on August 6, 2010 at 2:30 PM at the same time Stern has all of his Motion’s set.

June 9, 2010 Letter from her to her mother from 2000.

Excepts Anna Nicole Smith’s Diary from 1991 and 1992.

I am putting this up because I believe they have been public since probably 2007, just not easily located. By going through the diary excerpts I found several interesting things. 1.) Anna Nicole Smith was a very screwed up woman, however she knew what she wanted any child to look like and it was not Howard K. Stern. 2) Stern was so in meshed with his love and/or addiction to Anna Nicole Smith that he would have said and done anything she wanted. 3) That goes along with what many of you have said but I was unable to believe and that is Stern knew all along that Dannielynn was not his daughter but Larry Birkhead’s which is kind of sad he was willing to lie for Anna to have a baby and no father. I think Anna desperately wanted love and feared being alone, the diary shows she was a very lonely woman IMO. It also shows she appears to have been attractive to abusive men, I found that interesting. How sad she finally got the blond hair blue eye baby she so wanted before Daniel grew up and left home; a child loves unconditionally and I see a woman in here that displays that over and over again. I think the significance I see in this is that Virgie Arthur is going to be able to show that Stern lied and attack his character and credibility on those facts. So to those of you who told me over and over again that Howard K. Stern knew he was not the father, you had greater insight in to all things Anna Nicole Smith and I did not. I remember when the DNA was announced and I called Krista Barth and cried on the phone with her for poor Howard, boy did I call that one wrong.

June 11, 2010 Order to remove Turner’s Medical Records from the Harris County Clerk public site stating the records are protective under TRCP 76a(2)(a)(2) based the access of the medical records is otherwise restricted by law.

MORE PAPERS WILL BE UP AS WE GET THEM ON ANY AND ALL CASES.

HOUSEKEEPING DOCUMENTS FROM THE NINTH COURT OF APPEALS

May 6, 2010 Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate Motion for Stay of Mandate pending the filing a Motion for Stay Pending Petition for Certiorari to the U. S. Supreme Court. This filing has some new facts for the appeal listed by the attorneys for the Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate.

May 12, 2101 Order from the Ninth Circuit of Court of Appeals GRANTING Stay of Mandate.

NEWS ON THE CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL TRIAL

Multiple sources have told me that Dr. Khristine Eroshevich is on her fourth attorney in the criminal case, NOT good wonder what the problem is with her and her attorneys? Stern and Dr. Sandeep Kapoor has kept their legal teams in tact from the beginning. Could Eroshevich being going through lawyers like stockings you discard because you don’t like them or is this a smart ploy to get the August trial date moved past the California elections in November of this year. I was also told that Nazarian and Associates are no longer representing her. I was not able to contact any of the attorneys involved in this musical chair like of switching attorneys, however I was able to get in touch with Nazarian and Associates and asked them if that was true only to be turned away with the norm for Hollywood of “No Comment at this time”. So what’s up with Dr. Eroshevich? Perhaps y’all are again right in your take she is going down for that laundry list of drugs but not Kapoor or Stern. It appears I might have called this one of none convicted as wrong, glad I don’t bet on football or horses.

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

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

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

Tags: Alan Diamond Esq., Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Bruce Ross Esq., CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, Edward L. Xanders esq., Entertainment Tonight, Estate of Anna Nicole smith, Estate of Pierce Marshall, Greines Martin Stein & Richland LLP, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Holland & Knight LLP, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Howard K Stern, J. Christopher Smith Esq., John J. Nazarian, Kent L. Richland Esq., L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Nazarian and Associates, Neil McCabe, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Philip W. Boesch, Philip W. Boesch Jr. Esq., Pierce Marshall, Rose Turner, Steve Sadow Esq., The Boesch Law Group, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, U. S. Supreme Court, Virgie Arthur, Vivian L. Thoreen Esq.

In filings today with the Ninth Court of Federal Appeals the Estate for Anna Nicole Smith = Dannielynn, filed for a Rehearing and/or a Rehearing En Banc [full court]. The filing points out that the same three judge panel is what propel this case to the U. S. Supreme Court of which Anna Nicole Smith won in a 9-1 decision in May 2006. Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate asked for an Extension to file this Request for Rehearing on March 26.

I predicted after the attorney, Kent L. Richland, for the Estate said they were looking at a return to the U. S. Supreme Court that we would be going for round two and here we are. This will take some time because Elaine Marshall on behalf of the Estate for Pierce Marshall, Smith’s long time adversary – enemy will file to a Response to deny any rehearing, the ninth circuit court will make it’s decision but look for it to end up back in the U. S. Supreme Court for round two. There is just way too much money at stake for either side to walk away from.

NEW PAPERS IN SOUTH CAROLINA FEDERAL COURT IN THE ESTATE OF ANNA NICOLE SMITH VS. G. BEN THOMPSON AND FORD SHELLEY.

April 5, 2010 Court Order appointing G. Ben Thompson as a Pro Se Defendant in the South Carolina Federal Court.

NEW PAPERS IN HARRIS COUNTY 80TH DISTRICT COURT IN VIRGIE ARTHUR VS. HOWARD K. STERN, TMZ.COM, HARVEY LEVIN, LARRY BIRKHEAD ET AL. IN HOUSTON TEXAS.

April 6, 2010 Parties Partially Agreed Motion to Continuance of the Deadlines in the 80th District Court Harris County.

April 6, 2010 Notice of Docket Submission for April 19, 2010 for the Partially Agreed Motion for Continuance.

April 7, 2010 Notice of Associated Counsel by TMZ.com and Harvey Levin.

April 7, 2010 Proposed Docket Control Order.

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

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

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

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith Heir, Anna Nicole Smith's daughter, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, Bruce S. Ross Esq., CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Elaine Marshall, Entertainment Tonight, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, Kent L. Richiand Esq., Kent L. Richland, Kent Richiand, Kent Richland Esq., L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Neil McCabe, Philip W. Boesch Jr. Esq., Pierce Marshall, Pierce Marshall Estate, Rehearing En Banc, Rose Turner, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, U. S. Ninth Court of Appeals, U. S. Supreme Court, Virgie Arthur

On March 22, 2010 Elaine Marshall the Executor of Pierce Marshall’s Estate filed a notice of change of firm name for her lawyers.

Not surprising on March 24, 2010 Howard K. Stern, the Executor of Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate, filed an Unopposed Motion to extend time to file petition for rehearing until April 9, 2010 at 11:59 P. M. In the Unopposed Motion Stern states that the filing will not just be for a rehearing but in fact a Motion for Rehearing En Banc.

Can we say this is the expected round two of Elaine vs. Dannielynn in the U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals? Do you think the rehearing will be granted? Do you think the U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will grant one of the rare En Banc (full court) rehearing? Is this suit headed back to the U. S. Supreme Court as one of the lawyers for Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate is hinting at?

In a statement on March 22, 2010 Kent Richland, a lawyer for Smith’s estate vowed to appeal the latest ruling, possibly to the Supreme Court on different issues than those it first considered. “It really is a unique decision,” Richland said. “We have to take it farther.”

The Estate’s lawyers have asked for an extension from the current due date of April 2, 2010 to file a Motion for Rehearing until the new date of April 10, 2010, stating that the Estate “has not found any other Appellate Court has issued any Opinion has ever so held or otherwise construed the power of a bankruptcy court to enter final judgment so restrictively. This issue would thus appear to be of first impression”.

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

©Rose Turner
March 24, 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: Alan Diamond Esq., Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate, Bruce S. Ross Esq., Celebrity Trials, Dannielynn, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Edward L. Xaznders Esq., Elaine Marshall, Eric Brunstad Esq., Estate of Anna Nicole smith, Estate of E. Pierce Marshall, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, Kent Richland Esq., Philip W. Boesch Jr. Esq., Pierce Marshall, Pierce Marshall’s Estate, Rehearing En Banc, U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, U. S. Supreme Court

New documents released today was two Orders from Judge Chin Southern District Federal Court in New York, one was ruled Moot after Wood contacted the Court and withdrew his request to unseal all of the paperwork. The other one was against Wood and allowing Mark Speer to have ALL documents and depositions filed under seal in New York for his state suit in California where Howard K. Stern is suing Speer. Judge Chin reason this was only fair to level the playing field was I noted was that Rita’s lawyers did NOT oppose the Motion for Mark Speer to have all of these sealed documents and depositions. They are to remain under Seal and be govern by the New York Order of Confidentiality.

The other two filings were in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals from Elaine Marshall as the court had Order her to file before or by May 1, 2009. Both of these are good reads for those who love legal papers.

May 1, 2009 Order from the federal court denying Stern’s request of keeping the case documents private and only to be used in New York, Rita lawyers was not opposed and the judge felt this would level the playing field for Speer in the Stern vs. Speers in California court.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1975.

May 1, 2009 The federal court in New York ruled that Wood had the right to withdraw his previous request to open all of the records up since some of them had been leaked, and granting the request it appears of not turning over Clark’s deposition to the California DOJ.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1976.

May 1, 2009 Elaine Marshall’s Supplemental Brief stating how she wants to court to Order to Dismiss and going into detail why it should be missed.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1977.

May 1, 2009 Elaine Marshall’s Request for Judicial Notice with the memorandum of points she wants the ninth circuit to address in order to get the case dismissed.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1978.

May 1, 2009 Virgie Arthur filed an Adversarial suit against Bonnie Stern in the California Central Bankruptcy Court.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1981.

Pick up any of the court filings of documents in the Download Section opened to ALL not just members of Rose Speaks.

©Rose Turner
May 2, 2009
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. 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 article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

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

Tags: All Things Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate, Bonnie Stern, Celebrity Trials, Dannielynn, Elaine Marshall, Hachette Books, Howard K Stern, Judge Denny Chin, L. Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Mark Speer, Pierce Marshall, Rita Cosby

Once Justice Kennedy refused to intervene the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an Order that lifts the stay as of March 30, 2009 and allows the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith to begin the search for any assets that have been hidden by Pierce Marshall before his death in 2006 of the Marshall Estate since his death.

In the Court Order the court also set dates and deadlines on briefs and set a hearing date for Oral Arguments as well. The Justices assign to oversee this process is the Honorable BEEZER, the Honorable KLEINFELD and the Honorable PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

The Court also ruled that on or before April 20, 2009, each party shall file a status report. Each report shall identify (1) all parties in interest, (2) the attorneys of record, (3) the real parties in interest, (4) any executors of an estate having an interest in these proceedings and (5) any guardian and/or guardian ad litem of an interested minor. All briefs shall be prepared and filed in compliance with the Circuit’s electronic filing requirements.

Appellant Elaine T. Marshall shall file with the Clerk of the Court a supplemental opening brief containing no more than 14,000 words on or before May 1, 2009. Appellee Howard K. Stern shall file a supplemental answering brief containing no more than 14,000 words within 30 days of the filing of Appellant Marshall’s supplemental opening brief. Appellant Marshall may file a supplemental reply brief containing no more than 7,000 words within 14 days of the filing of Appellee Stern’s supplemental answering brief. No further briefs shall be filed by the parties. The parties shall address, at a minimum, the following issues:

(1) Whether Vickie Lynn Marshall’s (“Vickie”) claim was a “core” bankruptcy proceeding;

(2) If Vickie’s claim was not a “core” bankruptcy proceeding, whether the Texas probate court’s judgment precludes Vickie’s claim, in whole or in part;

(3) Whether the statute of frauds affects Vickie’s ability to establish her claim;

(4) Whether the discovery sanctions ordered by the district court were reasonable; and

(5) If Vickie’s surviving child is a real party in interest and has no guardian ad litem, whether the court should appoint a guardian ad litem and, if so, who the guardian ad litem should be and what provisions should be made for the guardian ad litem’s compensation.

On or before June 8, 2009, the parties shall jointly file a statement indicating the name of the attorney or attorneys who will present oral argument. No more than two attorneys may present argument on a party’s behalf. If a party intends to have two attorneys present oral argument, this joint statement shall specify the issue and time allocation between the attorneys.

The court intends to hear this matter at 10:00 a.m. on June 26, 2009. Oral argument will be conducted in Courtroom One on the Eighth Floor of Seattle’s William Kenzo Nakamura United States Courthouse. Each party shall have 30 minutes to argue.

We are uploading Elaine Marshall’s 857 page Response to the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith asking for help from the Supreme Court to lift the stay so the Estate could try to determine if assets are being hidden and if so where might they have been hidden.

The pages are enlightening and are different of course then what Smith’s Estate filed asking for help lifting the stay from Justice Kennedy.

Download the Order issued, read through it and come discuss it with us. We will be posting the additional download on the front page as they are ready for your reading pleasure. The documents for the Ninth Circuit is under that title in the download section opened to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

©Rose Turner
March 22, 2009
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. 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 article are the opinions and sole property of the 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, Celebrity Trials, Dannielynn, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Elaine T. Marshall, Howard K Stern, J. Howard Marshall, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Pierce Marshall, the Honorable BEEZER, the Honorable KLEINFELD, the Honorable PAEZ, Vickie Lynn Marshall