Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: msgumshoe

No, it just showed that other thieves and liars came up with something they thought would “prove” that and it didn’t, to me.

There are good, innocent reasons why staple holes don’t line up. There are also good, innocent reasons why extreme measures have to be taken to guard someone’s privacy who was a very private individual.

When you have a team with someone like HKS on it, who will steal confidential information from right off counsel’s table, extreme measures are called for.


6,987 posted on 04/20/2007 9:26:26 PM PDT by Rte66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6983 | View Replies ]


To: Rte66
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)

7,025 posted on 04/20/2007 10:34:23 PM PDT by Bronwynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6987 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson