Anna Nicole Smith Wows Washington (… and wins)
UPDATE (5.1.06): Supreme Court backs Anna Nicole Smith…
Over the objection of the son, the court sided with the widow. It claimed
authority over the case because it deemed it a "core proceeding"
under bankruptcy law.On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed, saying
that the state's exclusive jurisdiction over probate matters stripped federal
courts of the power to consider any "probate related matter."Ginsburg said the appeals court went too far. "We hold that the Ninth
Circuit had no warrant from Congress, or from decisions of this Court, for
its sweeping extension of the probate exception," Ginsburg said.While the Supreme Court has recognized a "probate exception" to
federal jurisdiction in bankruptcy cases, she wrote, that exception does not
bar federal courts from all state matters of probate.Ginsburg ordered the controversy returned to U.S. District Court for further
consideration in light of today's ruling.
Elsewhere, in the aftermath of the Dick
Cheney hunting accident and the Dubai ports deal, the White House announced
a one-day moratorium on doing anything idiotic. Playmate's
Date with Justice
If you need a chuckle read the quickie take above. I'll save the
Clarence Thomas jokes for others.
 |
It started in the Texas state courts, in probate. Not surprisingly,
they ruled that Anna gets bupkiss.
It then went to the California bankruptcy court, because Mrs.
Marshall, aka Anna Nicole Smith, had to declare bankruptcy after her husband's
son came after her, once daddy was dead. She was awarded $450 million.
Another court cut the award, then the case went to the 9th Circuit
which overturned the ruling, going back to Anna gets bupkiss.
“He was my Prince Charming,”
Smith said. “I'll never find another Howard.” After
he died, the predictable legal battle between Smith and Marshall's son over
his other millions turned ugly. “I'm not a gold digger, or I could
have married him a week after we met,” Smith said. “I didn't.”
Anna Nicole Smith Goes
to Washington
I don't doubt that for a second.
This week, the former stripper went to the Supreme Court.
To add a little twist to this Supreme margarita, the Bush administration
has weighed in on Anna Nicole's side, which is more about state and federal stuff
than the man, the woman he married, and the son who's stuck sharing dad's cash
with the stripper.
According to reports, the Supreme Court seems to be telegraphing
sympathy toward Anna Nicole, whom they see as being wronged. In my humble opinion
they are right.
Justice Breyer offered that after J. Howard Marshall drew up and
signed a new will, Pierce Marshall's lawyers supposedly secretly inserted 3
pages into the will without J. Howard's knowledge or consent. In addition, J.
Howard Marshall asked his attorneys to draw up papers to give his wife a gift
of money. Billing records of J. Howard's attorneys prove this fact, but evidently
this little bombshell never was presented before the case got to the Supreme
Court.
Norah O'Donnell quoted Justice Souter as saying the case, Anna
Nicole's claim, is “simple,” stating that it's all about “just
give me the money I would have had.”
One of the lawyers for Pierce Marshall came out of the courthouse
to say that people heard J. Howard Marshall say that marrying Anna Nicole “was
a mistake.” One has to wonder in what context that utterance, if it's true,
was made.
Over the years, I have researched every cultural angle
of relationships, marriage and sexuality there is to cover, every single one.
There's Dr. Laura's abominable take on modern partnership, with even Ken doll
Sean Hannity having “Dr. Hannity” hours on his radio show. Well if
they can do it, I sure have more than enough credibility on the subject.
So, Dr. Marsh is now in the house or on the blog, if you prefer.
This case matters. Many people today are entering into relationships
and partnerships that are anything but conventional. Stepchildren and siblings
older or as old as second or third wives is not uncommon, acrimony more likely
than not. Need I tell any of you that no one but the two involved in the marriage
knows what goes on between two people behind closed doors?
You can call Anna Nicole Smith a golddigger if you want, but that
is hardly the point. You can bring up her instability and many public fits of
outrageous behavior that would shame anyone, not the least of whom has got to
be Pierce Marshall. But what none of us have the right to do is judge that J.
Howard Marshall didn't truly love this woman. We simply don't know the facts.
That the Texas courts didn't award J. Howard Marshall's wife a
dime shouldn't surprise. It's a well connected family, with Pierce Marshall
holding a whole lot of purse strings. If you don't think state courts are political,
well, you just haven't been paying attention to the courts in this country.
It's particularly revealing that Pierce Marshall slyly and secretly
added papers to his father's will after it was signed. To me, that speaks volumes.
But who can blame a son for wanting daddy's cash, even believing you deserve
it?
However, after all the interviews I've done with couples and individuals
involved in older – much younger partnerships, I can tell you unequivocally
that a man in his 90s is going to get immense pleasure from having a young blonde
bombshell on his arm. It's not an uncommon phenomenon.
Besides, where's the prenuptial arrangement?
In 1994, Texas oilman J. Howard Marshall
II was 89 when he married a former Playboy Playmate of the Year (1993), Anna
Nicole Smith, who was then 26 years old. He died 14 months later with an estate
estimated by some to exceed $1 billion. Although Marshall's attorney
drew up a prenuptial agreement, it was never signed. Did Marshall promise
Smith half his estate? Did Marshall's son interfere with a testamentary disposition?
In 2001, Marshall's widow was awarded $475 million from his estate by a bankruptcy
court. However, this ruling was subsequently vacated and the 6 wills and 7 property
trusts Marshall had made over his lifetime reflected his intent and were found
to be valid. Subsequent legal skirmishes resulted in an $88.2-million settlement
for Smith in 2002. Celebrity
Estates
Why wouldn't Marshall sign the prenuptial if he intended to leave
his wife with nothing or very little? I've interviewed thousands of men on love,
marriage and money, and I can't find one instance where a man was worried about
his finances, with a doubt about full trust, where he didn't demand and get
a prenuptial. Men just aren't that dumb, but they can be that careless when
they have fallen head over heels with a woman.
The state and federal issues in the case do not interest me in
the least, which seems to be the way the Supreme Court justices who weighed in
felt as well, according to reports on cable. The thing that bothers me is that
the son used his power to strip his father's wife of something she was due, turning
her life into a living litigation nightmare, complete with threats of homelessness
and all sorts of other personal traumas, making an unstable situation even worse.
Pierce Marshall is the worst of all possible characters, a spoiled son who's
decided that his dad's choice of wife was inappropriate, so he wants to simply
obliterate her from the family history. Pierce is ashamed, so Anna Nicole must
pay, quite literally.
You can disagree with the marriage, dislike Mrs. Marshall, believe
she is a golddigger, but it's obvious that J. Howard Marshall II wanted her
in his life and didn't care enough to protect his assets from her, even though
he was 89 years old when they met. The man didn't get to where he was by being
stupid.
Anna Nicole played into Pierce's hands, but that doesn't make
his actions right or moral. You don't deserve vilification just because you're
a young, big breasted blonde married to your dream sugar daddy. I'll bet you
a glass of champagne that J. Howard Marshall II knew exactly what was going
on and so did Anna Nicole. The story turned ugly when the father had what the
son could never get because his pride won't ever let him go.
Mrs. J. Howard Marshall II is quite a character, but that doesn't
mean her late husband would have abandoned her to poverty or approved of his son taking his jealousy, egoism and vindictiveness out on his father's widow. Hell hath no fury like a greedy son shamed by old man dad.
Comments are closed.