| 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
“That, and the fact that (KE) insisted on having them put “MD and PhD” after her name on the ID graphic. No doctor of any kind, in their right mind, would want to bring attention to their profession in relation to the frootloops attached to ANS.”
I saw that whole bizarre interview too. Very creepy in lots of ways. I think the part you point out, IMO, leaves two possibilities: (ONE) KE has no “right” mind and was just going for her “5 mins of fame” whether it was good or bad press. (TWO) KE wanted to “nuke” herself professionally and wanted to make sure she got both her degrees at the same time. (Actually THREE possibilities)She was doing both ONE and TWO.
YW and LOL! That’s like when I got my BIA papers as an Indian and got to tell my (now-ex) husband that he is on the tribal rolls as an “IW” - Intermarried White.
Seems to me she has accomplished (c) “all of the above”! That might be my final answer, but you know how things change in this mystery case.
The problem still remains that the tortious interference claim never resolved the issue that the jury found that J. Howard Marshall himself, never intended to give her more then he already had.
Remember, that the tortious interference claim came about because while Smith was in the CA Bankruptcy Court, E. Pierce Marshall joined there to keep her from skipping out on a defamation suit he was planning on filing against her. Being joined to the Bankruptcy proceeding would guarantee him payment in the event she lost the defamation suit.
That’s when Smith accused Pierce of tortiously interferring in her probate contest. The Bankruptcy Judge agreed and awarded her $447M (which is really a probate issue, get it?). Pierce appealed to the higher Federal District court and they lowered it to $88M. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stepped in and said no, Federal court has no jurisdiction over the probate court.
The US Supreme Court says that the Federal Court has jurisdiction, but only with regard to tortious interference. In other words, the two issues need to be separated; tort vs. probate — then settle it from there.
In the upcoming months, (probably longer now because Smith is dead and there was a delay after E. Pierce Marshall’s death due to adminstration), the 9th Circuit has to ultimately decide whether the tortious interference claim is valid or let the Texas probate court ruling stand in its entirety, or decide that the probate court erred and award her $88M. But they are separate issues. Convoluted, but separate as far as the Constitution is concerned.
New briefs were already requested. Responding briefs will surely follow. They could drag it out again with another appeal to the US Supreme Court. The Marshall family, post E. Pierce’s death, has vowed to follow Pierce’s stead. There’s no end in sight. Experts forecast that Dannielynn would be able to handle it herself at the rate they are going.
Damn, I sure hope I got all that right. Too many courts, laws and amounts to remember here. ;0)
***********************************************
The ANS legal tangle is being debated by attorneys so it is ambitious for us lay persons to try to sort through the possible outcomes on her cases.
You have a pretty good grasp on the issues but I think you may be mistaken on one important piece of the puzzle.
ANS DID lose and lost badly in Texas at the probate level. She was an atrocious witness and her attorneys were only able to level accusations of interference but had little to no proof.
When she filed bankruptcy in California her NEW lawyers were able to subpoena HUGE amounts of documents from Pierce and attorneys. When Pierce appealed that verdict they subpoenaed even MORE material and gathered more proof of interference.
All of this interference and acts of deception by Pierce were right after ANS married J. Howard. THe legal strategy had completely shifted from voiding the will to the argument that J. HOward intended to provide for ANS before his death. It was proven that he certainly had INTENDED on doing so and that there had been numerous discussions and attorney billings about ways to do this. It was shown that Pierce and the attorneys were in collsion to make sure that NEVER happened...and it didn’t.
I don’t think the probate case has anything to do with the case in California at all. The Texas Court never saw or heard the evidence that has been amassed against Pierce proving that he did interfere, back date, destroy documents and deceive his father about the content of papers he had him sign regarding the irrevocable trusts.
J. Howard had a history of taking very, very good care of the women he loved. He did intend for ANS to never worry about money again and to be cared for the rest of her life. Pierce cut her off immediately upon his death and denied that his father ever considered providing for her in a catchall trust. Simply not true and that was proven to be a false statement in California.
What has been established is that Pierce had complete control and manipulated his father and his assets with the clear objective of making sure that ANS was cut out of any money after J. Howard died.
The Marshall’s have a huge problem.
ANS has a new problem. The video that surfaced recently that has J. Howard on the back of the 4 wheeler and giving his “last will and testament”. ANS’s will have another obstacle to overcome in that new piece of evidence on what J. Howard’s wishes were.
I think you are right on with that post. IMO, the holdup is not Virgie other than the fact that she is trying to get the money AWAY from HKS and to DL and maybe also to find out where ANS money has gone.
Oooooooh, the hair just stood up on the back of my head!
It’s been almost two months since the first day Larry met his baby for the very first time - can you believe it’s been that long?! Happy 2-month anniversary Larry :)
timeline item:
Sunday, February 25, 2007
BIRKHEAD, STERN, SHELLEY MEET; ARTHUR EXCLUDED - Ron RALES “pants’on’ story; story is sensationalized as ‘secret’. Rales enjoys retelling his pants-on story
IN BAHAMAS: ARTHUR visits Daniel’s grave
BIRKHEAD met the baby for the first time Sunday night,”The Insider” reported.
STERN allows Birkhead to see 5-month-old Dannielynn on Sunday.
John O’QUINN, said Stern had denied Arthur permission to visit the infant.
O’Quinn states in disgust: “Howard Stern said to Vergie, ‘I’ll let you see her as well - if you give up your appeal,’
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
ARTHUR gets permission to see the Dannielynn, her lawyer said Tuesday.
Arthur was crying as she left to board a flight to Florida after being given only 15 minutes to see the child. Deborah Rose, her Bahamian attorney said the permission “did not come from the COURT.”
-
ET - Stern: “I would not let Virgie alone with Dannielynn, because I know that’s not what Anna would have wanted.
I was told Virgie could come and see Dannilyn, and she watched Dannielynn sleep for 15 minutes. She was angry that I wouldn’t let her touch Dannielynn or wake her up.”
ET - Stern is claiming that all Virgie wanted was to sell the video rights to Anna’s funeral so she could become a rich woman.
Virgie has had only 15 minutes time with her granddaughter as of this date. Two months ago, she recieved permission to briefly view the her granddaughter; she was not permitted to touch the child and left in tears. For the past 7 weeks, Arthur has only seen photographs her granddaughter.
***
I agree. Virgie can't count on seeing DL as LB's mom can. BUT I think Virgie is doing what she is doing to get justice for ANS and Daniel. I went through it with my mother when my brother was murdered. She didn't want anything but to get the guy who killed him to go to jail. She liked to have killed herself fretting and worrying about whether or not the DA/jurors did the right thing. In the end, he copped a deal and got off early.
I think Opri negotiated that. Gotta pay her legal bills ya know!
I think Opri negotiated that. Gotta pay her legal bills ya know!
wasn't it Jackie Hatten that said that Daniel was thinking of joining the military? I think so. I recall she said that Daniel didn't want to be in front of the camera
Nice wrap-up on that subject, msg!
Disappointed that Don Hogan has a despicable past - but it does show Virgie’s courage in protecting her children.
Obviously, Don Hogan’s absence was a huge hole in Anna’s life which she tried to revive. Some late term adult ‘parent/child reunions’ are horror stories. Apparently true wrt Don Hogan and Anna.
“”””wasn’t it Jackie Hatten that said that Daniel was thinking of joining the military? I think so. I recall she said that Daniel didn’t want to be in front of the camera”””
Yes, I do remember the military part - but I also remember comments that Daniel wanted to work BEHIND the camera - and had some production job in that Alien movie.
so as usual - we are both correct;) LOL
I don’t know what to think about Opri. Granted, she does have money coming to her legitimately, but should also keep her client’s best interests in mind. Or am I being too idealistic once again?
ahh..but 'over the years' isn't what's applicable. It was her current behavior that counted, and by all accounts, Anna had successfully detoxed for 2 weeks and was on a maintenence dose of methadone (with zanax) while being looked after by the shelleys The fact that methadone was illegal in the Bahamas and Anna's move to the Bahamas, could lend one to believe that it was her own way of continued self-imposed deprival.
It was only when Stern appeared at the Shelleys that Anna's behavior changed. It was only when Stern/Eroshevic appeared in the Bahamas, that Anna was back on multiple drugs and multiple doses. It would have taken more than methadone maintenance, for Anna to have lost custody. When you view the clown video in that light, Sterns' commentary, starts to make sense - and IMO ties in with the 'committment ceremony'.
sometimes evidence can be uncovered in a civil trial, that may not be obtained any other way, that would be significant enough to be used in bringing about criminal charges. Maybe that is why the police officer grandmom wants to make sure that avenue is left open for her - Virgie wants Stern's hide, especially after the way he's been allowed to treat her regarding the grandbaby.
talk about melodramatic! there were lights on when the black suv's were hauling stuff out of the house; lights on when the shelleys got there to change the locks, and lights on 4 hours later (the amount of time it took to 'get the paperwork) when Pol had the locks changed again..then the next day, magically, no lights ! I bet they just threw the circuit breaker lolol
In the case of real estate, a ‘stranger’ can go into the county tax office and ‘buy’ a ‘tax lien’, by paying the back taxes on a residence. I do not think there is a process for that with corporations.
A person silly enough to ‘assume’ an ‘abandoned’ company, would be talking to the franchise tax board pretty quickly, about past due state taxes, not to mention the EDD for past payroll taxes and workers’ comp etc etc., for which the company would still be liable and for which the franchise tax board and other agencies would expect to be paid.
If the company was sold to a new owner, there would be a paper trail, a contract for sale, and at the very least an announcement of sale and notice to creditors of pending sale which would customarily be published in newspapers for a 3-wk timeframe to allow all creditors the oppty to make a claim for payment of outstanding amounts due. Sometimes there are Court filings related to the sale.
There’s a paper trail we haven’t unearthed yet, but it’s there somewhere swimming around in the public notices section of newspapers or in superior court filings recording the transfer.
Coming for LA have you had any “meetings” with ghosts? I saw a thing on TV during Katrina where one of the building the National Guard was guarding had several resident ghosts, really freaked the girls and guys out.
and is she above reproach trying to “use” her grandchild to exact revenge? I think not.
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.