| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/13/2007 6:39:17 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
New thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1910919/posts?page=1 |
Posted on 04/07/2007 3:14:35 PM PDT by mom4kittys
Thread Number 3
Intentionally slandered for gain....is not provable as far as I can stretch it in this case. As far as damage....STERN has no reputation and people didn’t have to be told by O’Quinn of the suspiciousness of the deaths. Why do you think they are having an inquest??
That’s true.
Another thought: It could be that the insurance policies would be paid out to the corporations that Stern set up.
Another thing: I bet there were policies on Daniel too.
It seems that anyone related by blood to the deceased is entitled to make inquiry on life insurance and all other assets.
IIRC insurance policies are autonomous instruments, governed by the named beneficiary and not subject to a prior or subsequent written will. Unless of course the named beneficiary is “ESTATE”.
That hokey will has still not been probated right?
“”””in any dispute she may have with plaintiff Stern over the custody of Anna Nicole Smith’s body, parental custody of Dannielynn and/or control of the estate of Anna Nicole Smith,”””””
What a load of (rhymes with spit)! Under any ethical court of law or standard (i.e. without the tabloid stench) Stern had no legal standing - not husband, not father of DL, not custodian, not power of attorney, not guardian ad litem.
Who is living in delusion land?
Could the reason for he extension be so that O’Q can have more time to contest the toilet paper will?
If the will was written up so “cleverly”, I would guess any insurance policies would be as “cleverly” written.
I can’t see how this case can go forward prior to the inquest. I think Stern wants to use this case to make the inquest go away. Period!!
“”””If the will was written up so “cleverly”, I would guess any insurance policies would be as “cleverly” written.”””
Agree - he could have added all sorts of devious clauses and codicils...he is diabolical. O’Quinn has to be even more devious to catch this cretin.
If he gets away with it - then the plans had to have been DIRECTED over several years.
I’d like to clarify blood relatives and heirs. Guess I’ll google.
Per stirpes is a method for distributing the estate of a deceased individual. Per stirpes (which is Latin for “per branch”) specifies that each branch of the deceased person’s family receives an equal share of the estate, regardless of how many people are in that branch. For example, if A and B are the children of the deceased, but B is also deceased leaving children C, D, E, F and G (the grandchildren of the original person), then A would receive one half of the estate and each of B’s 5 children would receive one-tenth of the estate (essentially, they are dividing B’s half). Per stirpes is different from per capita, because per captia weighs each person equally, rather than each branch equally.
Welcome to FR. I've just got online to Free Republic today, and I'm looking forward to reading all your posts and the responses. Looks like you've posted some interesting information, and I hope it gives some of us something to look forward to! We've watched HKS manipulate the courts and everyone involved with ANS, and I (for one) look forward to him getting his comeuppance.
It would be interesting to find out if any insurance policies were purchsed and/or updated in 2001 or after. Even then, any benefit for Daniel would be via Trust.
Well the inquest date is July 16 and the suit is July l7
Sounds like Stern, Rale, Barth and others will be busy.
Hi Pesky One and thanks for the welcome
Bye for now..........have to reboot the computer.
Remember, Perper said his case could be reopened if the results of the Inquest give some cause. And, if that is the case, it means his "verdict" was inconclusive and should have been left at that. And I believe that one of the Sheriff's said the Florida case should have never been closed.
This is one of those "cart before the horse" things. This inquest was originally scheduled for October of 2006.
And I don't think either Stern or Larry will show up in the Bahamas for it.
“””I’d like to clarify blood relatives and heirs.”””
See what liberalism has done? It has turned legal marriages, progeny and all other family/inheritance laws upside down.
From what I understand - children born out of wedlock are entitled to the same inheritance as legitimate heirs. IOW an ‘only child’ might have dozens of unknown half-siblings all of whom (with or without a will) could claim an inheritance. Not to mention ex-wives, non-wives and assorted leeches.
Consider the Marshall Estate - Dannielynn is not blood related to the old man, born after his death, the result of an out of wedlock union.
Trouble ahead!
That’s what I was thinking about the Marshall case, too. There was talk about him adopting “Daniel” IIRC but that never happened. I think the whole Marshall case has changed way beyond what Howard thinks....and I never believed he would pursue it anyways....He’s got all the money he needs...stashed...from years of embezzling. Remember, embezzlers rarely get caught early on.
I think Anna’s contention was that she needed the money to take care of Danny to start with....and she was broke...despite the thousands and thousand in goods she received and have not turned up. Somewhere, there’s a jeweler with a nice historical Anna collection since there weren’t any jewels in her USA estate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.