Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shades who wrote (60055)	5/1/2006 5:01:36 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 110194

High Crt Rules For Nicole Smith In Estate Case (HAHA - YOU GO GIRL - sexonomics - what did Gordon Gecko say - 2/3rds left to idiot sons and widows? What is happening to states power? Federal has it all eh?) (ADDS comments from Anna Nicole Smith's attorney in 6th paragraph) By Mark H. Anderson Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The U.S. Supreme Court Monday ruled unanimously in favor of Vickie Marshall, the former Playmate known as Anna Nicole Smith, in her continued fight for a portion of her late husband's estate. The decision overturned a federal appeals court ruling that had limited Smith's ability to continue pressing for a share of Texas oilman J. Howard Marshall's estate in a federal court, where she has prevailed in trial court proceedings. However, Smith lost in her estate fight with Marshall's son, E. Pierce Marshall, in a Texas probate court. The case featured a voluptuous entertainer battling for estate funds from her short marriage to an elderly rich man. However, the Supreme Court's opinion turned on mundane matters of court jurisdiction and the proper legal venue for resolving disputes over estates. "Vickie Marshall's claim .. qualifies for adjudication in federal court," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in the Supreme Court opinion. In a statement, E. Pierce Marshall said he will continue to fight Smith's estate claims in the federal court proceedings. "Today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Marshall v. Marshall was on a technical issue and does not validate Smith's false claims and libelous accusations, " Marshall said. "I will continue to fight for my father's will & trust." Kent Richland, the representing Smith, said he is confident the ruling will lead to a win for her in lower courts. "Anna Nicol Smith's claim existed years before her husband died and years before thoughts of probate even began," Richland said in a statement. "The court has ratified her position." The decision clarified the boundaries of federal court review of probate matters, ruling that issues normally handled by a federal court may be litigated there even in a probate matter. Under the opinion, state courts maintain jurisdiction over the handling of wills and administration of estates. "The probate exception does not bar federal courts from adjudicating matters outside those confines," Ginsburg said. Smith attended oral arguments in the appeal, drawing a throng of paparazzi to the Supreme Court and creating a Hollywood buzz around the austere marble columns that normally doesn't occur at the high court. At the oral arguments, the justices appeared favorable to Smith's claims. The case now goes back to lower courts for further deliberations where Smith will have a renewed effort to claim part of the estimated $1.6 billion Marshall estate. -By Mark H. Anderson, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-9254; mark.anderson@dowjones.com (END) Dow Jones Newswires May 01, 2006 15:50 ET (19:50 GMT) Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.- - 03 50 PM EDT 05-01-06