Glad you got an answer on that - yeah, the will was July 30, 2001 - Khavarian’s first suspension was just 2 days later - August 1, 2001. He was suspended most of the next 2.5 years and finally disbarred in March 2004.
~~~~
Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law
Effective Date Description Case Number Resulting Status
Disciplinary and Related Actions
3/20/2004 Disbarment 03-N-1071 Disbarred
9/14/2003 Ordered inactive 03-N-1071 Not Eligible To Practice Law
7/31/2003 Ordered inactive 03-N-1071 Not Eligible To Practice Law
6/22/2003 Discipline w/actual suspension 02-O-11765 Not Eligible To Practice Law
2/5/2003 Discipline w/actual suspension 02-PM-11217 Not Eligible To Practice Law
10/11/2002 Ordered inactive 02-PM-11217 Not Eligible To Practice Law
9/19/2002 Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 99-O-13254 Not Eligible To Practice Law
8/30/2002 Ordered inactive 02-O-11765 Not Eligible To Practice Law
8/1/2001 Discipline w/actual suspension 99-O-13254 Not Eligible To Practice Law
Administrative Actions
9/16/2002 Suspended, failed to pay Bar membr. fees Not Eligible To Practice Law
~~~~
>>I have no idea what the date of the “Stern Rale Khavarian” 6% agreement might have been. I’ve been trying to find a logical point for making an educated guess, from looking at all the proceedings, but I just can’t - since we have no idea what part these guys played in any of it, other than Stern saying he was the atty for “entertainment contracts” and doesn’t give any concrete examples.
ANS’s actual Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization itself was discharged on March 25, 1999, effective as of March 8, 1999. So many cross-claims and counter-claims took place after that, under the same case pleading, that I don’t know up from down.
With all the “awards” of multi-million dollars and all the attendant overturnings and appeals of those awards, I’m not sure how in the world those debts could’ve been discharged!
I’m still looking for the judgment document that actually lists the debtor claims and how they were settled. That’s where HKS “says” this epheremous document shows up publicly. I don’t have Pacer or Lexis-Nexis, so can’t browse to find it.
I *believe* I have a partial list in among the Texas probate papers, but it’s not fully detailed. I remember the attorney claims in the 100s of 1000s, like 350-400.
Anyway, I can’t take much more time on looking until after I’m finished updating the Case Name List for Monday! Aarrgh!
btt
Ha ha - just re-read my post to see where I left off and see that I made up a new word, “epheremous.” Not bad, but it should have been “ephemeral.” I knew better!
However I choose to describe the ephemera that is HKS’s business dealings, it doesn’t really matter, lol. Now, back to the Jello-nailing.
I thought that Howard mentioned in Seidlin's Court that he didn't know that he was in Anna's will prior to receiving it. But that can't be correct because there is a conversation with KE about "Anna and I were just talking about changing it". IIRC, it was a taped message and only Howard and KE were discussing it.
Most wills contain succession clauses...If this happens then it goes to...
I think that's PART of what Dannielynn's birth certificate was about...and Howard expected to retain that right and expected the Bahama Court to support that right.
When that wasn't going to happen, Howard HAD to make a deal with Larry.
I don't think Howard wanted Dannielynn either and if things had gone his way with the court supporting him as the father, he MIGHT have given Dannielynn to Virgie (just as Anna had given Danny to Virgie) with a deal attached, of course.
But once Howard made the "I Hate Mommy" tape, that idea was in the trash.
Hoping for all good things for Virgie.