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