Anna Nicole Smith Estate vs. Susan M. Brown Esq Law Offices of Susan M. Brown et. al
Posted by Rose in All Things Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Beverly Hills, Bryan Cave LLP, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Don Clark, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Geraldo - Live, Geraldo At Large, Geraldo FOX News, Greta -On The Record, Greta Van Susteren, High Proflie Trials, Hollywood, Horizons law suit, Howard and Anna, Howard K Stern, John O'Quinn, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Neil McCabe, Nicole Jennings Wade, The John O'Quinn Law Firm, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur
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 (196)
March 2 , 2011 Motion by Counsel for Susand M. Brown and The Brown Law Firm to Wtithdraw (305)
March 2, 2100 Counsel for Susan M Brwon Motion to File Under Seal Memorandum Reason Withdraw as Counsel (298)
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

Entries (RSS)