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

To: LetsRok
Wrong. The estate of Marshall was settled over 6 months ago. She is entitled to nothing. Mr Marshalls’s son is the heir who inherited all the money. A jury decided that.

Where do you get your info? In what state was this decided? As you may or may not know the SCOTUS decided,less than a year ago,to uphold a ruling by a Federal Court judge that ANS was entitles to $88 million.

The way I read the explanation is that the SCOTUS has,in effect,decided that Federal courts have the power to get involved in state Probate Court actions.

Is the jury decision to which you refer in keeping with this unanimous Supreme Court decision?

172 posted on 04/10/2007 2:15:55 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: Gay State Conservative

The jury trial determined that Marshall’s ONLY WILL named his son Pierce is sole heir. The testimony that ANS gave that her husband “intended” to take care of her for life was not belived by the jury. That is settled. Any other ruling has to take that into consideration.


192 posted on 04/10/2007 2:39:16 PM PDT by LetsRok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]

To: Gay State Conservative

I have heard and read from several sources that Anna Nicole turned down the 88 million settlement. And ended up with nothing. Crazy of her if this is true - which it well might not be. She had the right to refile, but now is dead. The other day one lawyer stated that the chances of the baby getting anything is practically zero. But who knows!


217 posted on 04/10/2007 3:07:48 PM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | 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