• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • A Model Case Run Amok

    The late Anna Nicole Smith is back in the news. Smith died from a drug overdose in 2007, but her lawsuit against the estate of her former husband, J. Howard Marshall, lives on. In the latest legal maneuver, the executor of her estate, Howard K. Stern—who is currently facing legal troubles of his own after being charged with conspiring to prescribe and administer drugs to the late model in violation of California law—asked Justice Kennedy to lift a stay issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in order to allow the estate to collect on a judgment issued by a California federal court against Marshall’s estate. Kennedy rejected the request, which comes as little surprise, given the merits of the case, and the lack of merits of the petition.

    The whole tawdry tale is one of litigation run amok, which I have previously discussed here, and the ever insightful Professor Rotunda discussed more recently here. Recapping the case briefly, in an attempt to gain more than the millions in cash and gifts that she had received during his life, Anna Nicole challenged her billionaire husband’s estate plan, claiming that he had made a verbal promise of half of his fortune. The jury in Texas didn’t buy this story, so she shopped for a more receptive court in California, and she found one in a federal bankruptcy court. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the millions awarded by the court based upon a federal jurisdictional rule, but the Supreme Court in 2007 reversed, saying that the federal court could consider the merits of the case.

    Contrary to Stern’s failed petition, which suggests that he is now entitled to the judgment, his case looks grim. For when the Ninth Circuit looks at the merits, they will be obliged to apply Texas law and to respect the final decision of the Texas probate court. That court was crystal clear:

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED by the Court that J. HOWARD MARSHALL II did not intend to give and did not give to VICKIE LYNN MARSHALL, A/K/A ANNA NICOLE SMITH, a gift or bequest from the Estate of J. HOWARD MARSHALL II or from the J. Howard Marshall, II, Living Trust either prior to or upon his death.

    And yet, despite this clear finding, finality is not had. All the original players in the sad drama are now dead, but the litigation continues. The law treats probate court judgments as determinative of these questions for a reason: to avoid the protracted litigation and gamesmanship that have been the hallmark of this case.

    Posted in Legal [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to A Model Case Run Amok

    1. noodlemonkey, DC says:

      This is a great analysis of this whole tawdry mess. I hope that the 9th Circuit rules against Smith’s estate soon to finally give the Marshalls some peace.

    2. Andrew, Baltimore says:

      What really disturbs me about this whole mess is that the consequences of an award to Anna's estate from the Marshall estate would not end with their case. Such a ruling would be a complete undermining of estate planning, given that J. Howard Marshall expressly had his will state that he intended to leave Anna nothing and that he was providing for her future with the ample gifts he gave her during his lifetime, and so could serve as citation for frivolous will challenges in the future. Anyone with even the most meticulous of estate plans executed could be subject to a looting of their estate so long as they were closely related to someone greedy and shameless enough to not abandon a challenge of their will. People would have to start including modest gifts in their will just to pacify those who might cause trouble with the disposition of their assets. I for one hope that closure is brought to this case via the 9th circuit in a judgment favoring the Marshalls, anything else would find us a society far removed from the classic and logical principles of property succession and closer to a society where he who whines the loudest gets paid to quiet down.

    3. Joe, Cardboard box says:

      I am a bit curious as to where the 1.2 billion (or 1.6 according to wiki) inheritance actually ended up. I read that J Howard Marshall III was removed from the inheritance and even ended up paying some few millions to his brother.

      Since Smith never received any inheritance money, I assume everything was handed over to Pierce, correct? But now that he is dead, the inheritance goes to whoever he left it to, right? Or is the money still tied up by the courts?

      I think this is worth clarifying because in all of this nobody seems to be able to pinpoint where the inheritance went.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×