This week many people will remember the death of infamous playmate, Anna Nicole Smith. Three years ago reporters from all over the world descended upon Florida to cover the news of her untimely death, yet she continues to be at the center of a heated legal drama, involving a claim against her late husband’s estate, J. Howard Marshall.
According to Smith, J. Howard told her she could have a sizable portion of his estate after he died. Despite ample provisions for Smith during his lifetime, J. Howard Marshall’s detailed estate plan was clear: his assets were left to his youngest son and legal heir, E. Pierce Marshall. But Smith didn’t like being on the outside looking in and wanted what she considered her share. And so began a legal odyssey that has spanned more than 15 years, outlasted the deaths of all immediate plaintiffs and defendants, escalated to the U.S. Supreme Court and now is awaiting a decision in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Smith’s legal expeditions provide a classic example of forum shopping, jackpot justice and rampant abuse of our nation’s judicial system. For all their misspent and exorbitant legal fees, Smith’s lawsuits have accomplished little more than setting very dangerous precedent that American families and charities will be forced to shoulder and overcome in order to protect loved ones’ estates and retain family assets.
Following the death of J. Howard in 1995, Smith challenged his estate in the appropriate jurisdiction: Texas probate court. After a six month jury trial where over 40 witnesses were heard, the jury ultimately decided against Smith. But to complicate matters, while probate proceedings were pending, Smith and her legal team, including Howard K. Stern, tried to move the matter from Houston to a more favorable court in California, by filing a concurrent proceeding in a bankruptcy court. This was part of an apparent legal strategy to “forum shop” hoping to find a court that would be more favorable to her claims. This abusive strategy ultimately worked in her favor. The bankruptcy court reasoned that the case fell under its jurisdiction because Smith’s assets potentially included monies that might still go to her under ongoing proceedings involving the Marshall estate. The California bankruptcy judge “reasoned” an award of nearly $450 million.
But the champagne didn’t flow for long. The very first appeal of the bankruptcy court’s decision found that the Texas probate court was correct and ruled again against Smith. She lost everything and, in fact, was ordered to pay $1 million in legal fees and expenses to the Marshall family. The conflicting opinions between the Texas probate court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals turned the matter into a federal case.
In March 2002, a federal judge vacated the California bankruptcy court’s decision and issued a new ruling, with an award to Smith of $88 million. More than two years later, the pendulum swung again and a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the March 2002 decision, finding that federal courts lacked jurisdiction to overrule probate decisions. Finally!
In what can only be explained as one of life’s great mysteries, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to take up Smith’s case in 2005. The High Court only ruled on the probate exception and the decision didn’t yield Smith a cent, but it did give her the right to pursue her supposed share of J. Howard’s estate in federal court.
And that’s where this legal odyssey ends, for now. Smith’s case against the Marshall estate has been remanded to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for adjudication of all remaining unresolved appellate issues. The court heard oral arguments last June but we are still awaiting a final ruling to (hopefully) put an end to this legal saga.
So even three years after her death, Anna Nicole Smith is still racking up legal fees. She is still heaping abuses on Lady Justice. And, worst of all, she is still destroying the peace of mind of all Americans who trust in our legal system to protect the wishes of their families’ estates.
This entry was posted
on Monday, February 8th, 2010 at 3:25 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
|
I’m cheering for Lady Justice. Marshall made his wishes clear.
Philip Boetch is Vickie Marshall’s principal attorney against Pierce Marshall’s Estate. He filed a lawsuit against Pierce for “torturous interference.” You should talk to Mr. Boetch about the case and his motives to move on with litigation. Of course, Larry Birkhead as the father of Anna’s child wants to continue with the lawsuit as well. He thinks his daughter deserves that money.
*Boesch
Janice, really appreciate the way you explained this case.
My question is shouldn’t the father have protected his family with a prenuptial? I don’t feel the same way about the fear of Americans due to I feel this case is more about poor estate planing. When the father remarried and did not protect his family shows the public a lot. I just don’t know about this case and the feeling the wife did something wrong when bottom line is the older man went into a marriage without making arrangements for his wife after his death. He was the wealthy one with lawyers, he had to know what he was doing so why leave the family in this situation is the real fear.
Mary, the father was himself an attorney and he did leave a Will. After he married he did protect his family, he did make clear legal arrangements for his family. He gifted Ana Nicole with millions while he was alive, and he made a clear Will with the intent that his estate go to his son. The Will was attacked by Ana Nicole because she wanted even more money. He did provide for her. Didn’t he give her an eight million dollar ranch and millions more in other gifts such as expensive cars and valuable jewelry? The Texas probate court had a trial and ruled that she was not entitled to anything from the Will.
I do not feel sorry for Dannielynn the daughter. If her mother had kept the millions she received, the child would now be a millionaire.
Is the money hidden away somewhere so that Howard Stern will eventually spend it? Did Larry Birkhead get a large part of it already paid to him by Howard Stern? Did doctors who prescribed drugs to Ana Nicole get lots of money? Maybe some answers will come out in the pending criminal trials.
Mary, he protected his estate through proper estate planning in such a way that a prenup wasn’t necessary. ANS already lost in probate. She doesn’t get anything from her dead husbands estate.
What the case would currently do is take money from the estate of Marshall’s son, based on a claim of ANS that has no proof other than her word. It is a case against Pierce Marshall, claiming he interferred with her getting a gift from her husband. So a prenup has nothing to do with the still remaining case. JMO
this case has so many twists and turns to it that it becomes difficult to sort out all of the claims…..somehow…i would like to see the baby protected financially…God! The greed that prevails in this case is ridiculous.