Monday, May 01, 2006
Vicky Marshall (Anna Nicole Smith) Wins One
2006 WL 1131904 is your citation for you lawyers out there. The interesting thing about the opinion is that Pierce Marshall may have a legal malpractice claim if and when he has to hand over $89MM to Anna Nicole. 1) Anna Nicole files for bankruptcy protection -- she makes no claim at all against the old dead guy's estate; 2) Pierce screws up and files a defamation claim against Anna Nicole in her bankruptcy; 3) OOOPS, by filing a claim, Pierce subjects himself to a counterclaim in federal court -- Anna Nicole sues him for $44MM saying that the old dead guy would have given that to her had Pierce not interfered (which certain facts show that he did); 4) Federal court awards her $44MM compensatory and $44MM punitive for Pierce's wrongful acts; 5) state court rules that old dead guy's will is valid and Pierce gets it all; 6) Pierce argues that the federal judgment against him is invalid; 7) Ninth Circuit agrees with Pierce; 8) Supreme Court agrees with Anna Nicole and sends the case back to the federal courts (who have already ruled for her) for further legal proceedings on different issues. If Pierce does not file the spiteful claim in bankruptcy court, he is home right now spending all of his dad's money! He did, however, file a meaningless claim against a bankrupt woman just to mess with her. So, in my opinion, he deserves what he got. And his lawyer (if the lawyer made the decision to file the bankruptcy claim) better alert its insurer...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I would agree with you that gettig involved in the Bankruptcy was not a good idea and that the lawyers may have problems on their hands. However, 1.) she did make a claim against the old dead guys assets in probate 2.) Pierce filed a determination of non-dischargeability, not a proof of claim 3.) there are no facts to support the alleged interference 6.) SCOTUS remands the case to the 9th who has already ruled against her, not the district court.
Pierce won an $8MM jury verdict against Anna Nicole's attorneys on the same claim. That does not support your spiteful or meaningless arguments. So, in my opinion he did not deserve what he got.
Thank you for the substantive corrections -- I regret the sloppy writing. Good to see someone actually reads what I submit, even to disagree with me!
Post a Comment