|
|
Just what, exactly, is the Bush Administration weighing? |
Posted on 02/25/2006 12:43:08 PM PST by Tall_Texan
It's been a long and colorful journey for a girl from a small Texas town.
Anna Nicole Smith went to work in a Houston strip club and wound up as the trophy wife of an aging multimillionaire, setting up an 11-year-long legal war over his estate that now has traveled all the way to the highest court in the land.
The fight over the fortune of oil entrepreneur J. Howard Marshall II between the one-time Playboy Playmate of the Year and Marshall's youngest son, 67-year-old E. Pierce Marshall, goes before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday.
(snip)
Since then, the case has been through a succession of courtrooms, starting with a state probate court jury in Houston, which ruled in 2001 that Marshall did not leave any of his estate to Smith. A federal bankruptcy judge sided with Smith, another federal judge reduced the award and a federal appeals court ruled that federal courts should never have gotten involved.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday focused solely on the narrow question of whether federal courts can decide cases involving state probate proceedings. The Bush administration has filed briefs favoring federal court jurisdiction.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
She filed bankruptcy. That threw it into federal court.
I agree. He was with her for some time before. He wanted to marry her and was not senile then. He wanted her to have the money. she was his WIFE. who are WE to say what was valuable to him in the last years of his life? It was HIS money.
I hope she gets all the money. Those greedy, ugly kids don't deserve anything if they can't even be generous with the woman who gave their father a little pleasure in his last years! Yeesh.
She should get that 80 million out of the estate for sure.
my daughter and i love her......
Potentially...and you've seen the photos.
Um, O.K.
I wonder what the old boy's last words were........"Oh Baby!"
More likely something along the lines of "ACK! My heart!"
I'm surprised by some of the responses here. Whatever happened to the sanctity of marriage?
LOL....Can you swear beyond a reasonable doubt that your statement is the truth?
"I'm surprised by some of the responses here. Whatever happened to the sanctity of marriage?"
ROFLMAO BUMP!
|
|
Just what, exactly, is the Bush Administration weighing? |
Permission to cross examine the witness.
Their weighing in that she has the right to get the feds to do for her what the state courts wouldn't.
But then that may not have the points of your question.
Hey, who knows, she does seem to have a thing for powerful, older men!!! :B
They will probably issue a Writ Of Habeas Corpus ( The words habeas corpus ad subjiciendum are Latin for "(That) you may have/hold the body to be subjected to (examination)" and if so , she wins the appeal...:P
LOL!
Granted as long as you ask her if they are real as your opening question?
I totally agree that she deserves the half of the estate that is afforded to a surviving spouse. She may be crude, we may not like her, we might not choose to marry her ourselves, but the old coot had a right to marry whatever woman he chose to marry and he chose her.
The practical issue is that federal judges don't want their courts flooded with these kinds of cases when their dockets are already full.
It'll be interesting to see how the originalists and textualists deal with this.
The case was heard today by the SCOTUS.
Has anyone heard how the oral arguement went down?
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.