| Archive for January, 2011 |
|
| Posted by Janice | Permalink | 1 Comment | Add a comment |
Last week the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Stern v. Marshall. Will this be the end of a 16 year old legal battle? Only time will tell, as the decision is expected to be announced within a few months. In the meantime, the High Court must decide some very technical issues that address bankruptcy jurisdiction.
The case began when former reality TV star, Anna Nicole Smith, sued the son of her late husband, J. Howard Marshall II, for supposedly interfering with her ability to inherit half the Marshall estate. A Texas Probate Court ruled that Marshall took the necessary steps to protect his estate and intentionally disinherited Smith. Long story short, Smith filed bankruptcy in California during the Texas trial. This forum shopping, or, looking for a court that might provide a more favorable outcome, was utilized by Smith and her legal team; they seemed to succeed when the bankruptcy court ruled in her favor. Smith’s claim, however, (tortious interference with an expectancy of inheritance) is a personal injury tort. Notably, the U.S. Code says personal injury torts are automatically considered non-core to bankruptcy proceedings.
The fate of this case now rests with the Supreme Court Justices who will determine bankruptcy jurisdiction on matters of core versus non-core issues. During oral argument Justice Ruth Ginsburg said “this whole thing would be a futile exercise if the tort claim comes out of the bankruptcy judge’s” rulings. Lady Justice will keep you up to date on the latest!
January 25th, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized
|
|
| |
|
| Posted by Janice | Permalink | No comments | Add a comment |
The high-profile 16 year old Stern v. Marshall case is back at the United States Supreme Court. Howard K. Stern, acting as the executor of the late Anna Nicole Smith’s estate, is attempting to secure a piece of the multimillion dollar estate owned by late J. Howard Marshall, who Anna Nicole Smith married for several months in 1994. Smith’s legal team argued that an oral arrangement existed between her and Marshall, which went beyond the inheritance she was given after his passing. As reported in The Examiner.com:
While legal and casual observers often view Smith’s effort to use an unsubstantiated oral claim of entitlement as a money grab that violates Marshall’s carefully prepared and properly executed estate plan, years of litigation have made this case about much more. In addition to being “about money,” this case will likely produce landmark decisions involving not only inheritance rights, but also determine potential handling for other civil and states’ rights matters. Americans who believe this “celebrity” case has nothing to do with them are wrong. The use of legal gamesmanship to assault a legitimate estate plan as orchestrated by Smith and her legal team violates American property rights and could impact Americans of all economic, social and political straits on a number of fronts.
Lady Justice will provide updates about this landmark decision.
January 20th, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized
|
|
| |
|
| Posted by Janice | Permalink | No comments | Add a comment |
Conrad Murray’s preliminary trial wrapped up Tuesday with the medical examiner’s classification of Michael Jackson’s death as a homicide, even if he learned Jackson self-administered the final, fatal dose of propofol.
After 6 days of testimony, Judge Michael Pastor deemed Conrad Murray’s actions were outside the standards of medical care, and ordered him to stand trial for involuntary manslaughter. Moments after the ruling, Pastor suspended Murray’s license to practice medicine in California. One of Conrad’s attorneys felt the suspension could trigger similar actions in two other states where Murray practices. Lady Justice hopes Dr. Murray will be held accountable for his actions, and hopes the jury’s verdict will be honored (unlike the Anna Nicole Smith trial).
January 25 marks Murray’s return to court for arraignment, and Lady Justice will keep you appraised. Stay tuned…
January 13th, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized
|
|
| |
|
| Posted by Janice | Permalink | 1 Comment | Add a comment |
Day 4 of the criminal case against Conrad Murray was replete with more damaging testimony. LAPD Detective Dan Myers testified about how Murray engaged in numerous phone calls the day Jackson died. One such call was made to one of several women he was dating at the time, even though the “doctor” has a wife. He also has seven children from various women. One of those women, Nicole Alvarez, met Murray in 2005, at her place of employment – a Las Vegas gentlemen’s club. On behalf of the People of the State of California, the Deputy District Attorney questioned the hostile witness, Alvarez, about several deliveries made between March and June 2009 from Applied Pharmacy Services in Las Vegas to the Santa Monica apartment where Alvarez lived and Murray paid rent. It was this pharmacy where Murray received Propofol. Alvarez testified she neither opened the shipments, nor noticed the return address. She also complicity stated she did not keep track of Murray’s whereabouts, or, activities.
Houston cocktail waitress, Sade Anding, was on the phone with Murray at about the time he noticed Jackson’s deteriorated state. Anding stated, “I just remember saying, ‘Hello, hello, hello! Are you there? Are you there?” Soon after, she heard “a commotion, as if the phone was in a pocket or something,” followed by coughing and a “mumbling of voices” she could not recognize. Yet another girlfriend, Bridgette Morgan, testified she phoned Murray about 30 minutes before Jackson stopped breathing, but could not reach him. Testimony also came from Elissa Fleak, a coroner’s investigator, who found 12 bottles of a powerful anesthetic in Jackson’s bedroom and closet – 9 of which were located in a bag entitled “Baby Essentials.”
The fifth day of Murray’s preliminary hearing involved the testimony of Las Vegas pharmacist, Tim Lopez. He delivered 4 shipments of propofol (255 vials in all) to the doctor between March and June 2009. Lopez was not made aware that Jackson was Murray’s only patient. Murray explicitly advised Lopez not to personally deliver any drug shipments, even though Lopez had a planned trip to Los Angeles; rather, Lopez testified how Murray ordered him to maintain status quo by shipping via Federal Express.
Data from Murray’s iPhone was brought to light: the e-mail inbox illustrates his involvement in Jackson’s comeback tour. One e-mail, in particular, involved a London insurance broker querying Murray about Jackson’s health, a contingency to secure the policy. Murray responded by stating he was not authorized to divulge that information, and “as far as the statements of his health published by the press, let me say they are all fallacious to the best of my knowledge.” The “statements” alluded to by Murray involved media allegations of Jackson suffering from lupus, cancer, and other ailments. More to come…
January 10th, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized
|
|
| |
|
| Posted by Janice | Permalink | 6 Comments | Add a comment |
In response to the surprising outcome of the Anna Nicole Smith criminal trial, I was featured on the radio talk show KFWB in LA discussing Judge Perry’s decision to throw out the conviction of Smith’s former lover and lawyer, Howard K. Stern. Please go to the “News & Appearances” section of my blog to listen the clip. I was also featured on “Big Hollywood” with my opinion editorial piece on celebrity justice and America’s jury system. Perry’s shocking decision to overturn a jury of Stern’s peers is extremely disrespectful to the entire jury system. This was not a bench trial and those twelve men and women spent weeks agonizing over details to reach their decision. Additionally, Perry’s actions today are inconsistent with his own rulings throughout the trial – there were several attempts to have the conspiracy charges dismissed and he did not do that. Stay tuned for the latest!
January 10th, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
