Judge Weighs Sanctions in Favor of Anna Nicole Estate
The sanctions come in a claim originally filed by E. Pierce Marshall, the son of Smith’s late husband, Texas oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall, against the former Playboy model, who had filed for U.S. bankruptcy protection. The younger Marshall died in 2006 and Smith died of a drug overdose in 2007.
Just before a hearing on Monday, U.S. District Judge David Carter in the Central District of California wrote in a tentative order that he had several “open questions” left unresolved as to the scope of sanctions he ordered last year against the younger Marshall’s estate. He has tentatively scheduled a trial on the matter for April 29.
The circumstances of the case date back nearly two decades.
In 2000, a U.S. bankruptcy judge granted $474 million to Smith, whose real name was Vickie Lynn Marshall, after she alleged her late husband had intended to give her half his estate. Carter, who took over the dispute, vacated the order on jurisdictional ground. He granted $89 million to Smith.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed that award in 2004, citing a Texas probate court’s final judgment in 2001 over the elder Marshall’s estate, but the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed federal jurisdiction over the case. In a second appeal, the Supreme Court struck down the bankruptcy judge’s authority to issue an award.
Acting on the Ninth Circuit’s mandate on remand, Carter on May 29 upheld final judgment for the younger Marshall’s estate. But he also allowed Smith’s estate, represented by her former attorney and partner, Howard K. Stern, to pursue a motion for sanctions against the estate, represented by the son’s widow, Elaine Marshall. Carter also issued an order to show why a former attorney for the elder Marshall’s estate, Edwin Hunter, who is the son of the late U.S. District Judge Edwin Hunter in the Western District of Louisiana, should not be sanctioned.
“Here, there is considerable evidence showing the bad faith of Edwin Hunter and Pierce Marshall,” Carter wrote. On Dec. 9, Carter vacated his order for possible sanctions against Hunter, citing revelations of a 2000 settlement agreement between the attorney and Smith that resolved all claims for sanctions.
In an Oct. 3 motion, an attorney for Smith’s estate, Philip Boesch, founder of the Boesch Law Group in Santa Monica, Calif., argued that the younger Marshall failed to turn over a trust document that was critical in the case, destroyed other documents and, along with Hunter, lied about their actions and other details while scheming to prevent any payment to Smith.
Boesch’s initial request was for nearly $44.3 million—the amount of compensatory damages once awarded to Smith’s estate. But in subsequent filings, he offered an alternative request of $25 million. “Any dollar figure within his discretion would be appropriate,” Boesch said.
In court papers, Elaine Marshall’s attorney, G. Eric Brunstad, a partner at Dechert in Hartford, Conn., called the sanctions request a “thinly veiled effort” to win back the Smith estate’s $89 million award. Brunstad did not return a call for comment.
On Monday, Carter issued a tentative order that raised numerous questions about the scope of what he could issue in terms of sanctions, especially given the jurisdictional problems surrounding the case.
“He is dealing with pretty complex legal issues,” Boesch said. “And since the case has already been up to the Supreme Court twice, we don’t have any problem at all with him being cautious and careful.”
Contact Amanda Bronstad at abronstad@alm.com.
Read more: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202649312245/Judge-Weighs-Sanctions-in-Favor-of-Anna-Nicole-Estate#ixzz2xpJQfdgq
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.