...just got a little more fun. Details here, here, and here. (Gavel bang: Howard Bashman/How Appealing.)*
The lede of Charles Lane's Washington Post story is pretty priceless, so Article III Groupie will share it with you here:
Playboy Playmate of the Year. Reality TV Star. National Enquirer columnist. And now, to these titles, Anna Nicole Smith can add another: Supreme Court litigant.
The erstwhile Texas stripper's long legal battle for a share of her late billionaire husband's estate will apparently reach a climax before the justices, who announced yesterday that they have accepted her request to review a federal appeals court ruling last year that gave all the money to the man's son.
How is Ms. Smith taking the news of the cert grant? According to Howard Stern,** Ms. Smith's lawyer, "She's very excited. She will be attending arguments, there's no question about that." A3G can't help wondering: Did the prospect of Ms. Smith's attendance influence the male justices in deciding whether to grant her petition for certiorari?
And what are the buxom starlet's chances of prevailing on appeal? One might think that the luscious Ms. Smith -- a.k.a. "Vickie Lynn Marshall, Petitioner" -- could count on this familiar equation:
Ninth Circuit decision + Cert grant = Unanimous summary reversal
But this case may not be quite so easy. First, she is facing formidable opposing counsel: G. Eric Brunstad, Jr., a super-cute bankruptcy law professor at Yale, ably assisted by Goldstein & Howe. Second, the question presented is a fairly technical one (as opposed to one of the politically charged, hot button issues that the Ninth Circuit willfully screws up). As explained over at SCOTUSblog by Lyle Denniston, the case of Marshall v. Marshall, No. 04-1544, concerns "whether the 'probate exception' to federal court jurisdiction bars those courts entirely from deciding estate-settlement cases, usually reserved for state courts" -- an issue that the Court last ruled upon in 1946.
Gosh, that's pretty heady stuff! Whether Anna Nicole Smith will be able to follow the oral argument in her case remains to be seen. But her glamorous presence at One First Street certainly provides yet another argument for cameras in the courtroom!
* For commentary on a pretty funny headline about the case, click here (third item down).
** Attorney Howard K. Stern is no relation to Howard Stern, the radio personality. Those of you who watched The Anna Nicole Show -- yes, A3G will 'fess up, she caught an episode or two (or three, or four) -- may recall the disturbingly close attorney-client relationship between Mr. Stern and Ms. Smith...
Comments