More Bad News for Anna Nicole Smith

Ninth Circuit Rejects Her Appeal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco has once again rejected all claims made by former stripper Anna Nicole Smith against E. Pierce Marshall. In December 2004 a three-judge panel overturned an award of $88 million to Smith. This week the court rejected Smith's appeal for a rehearing en banc by the full 9th Circuit.

"Not only does this ruling uphold my father's estate plan it also confirms once and for all that all of the outrageous unsupported "findings of facts" made against myself and my father's advisors in the lower California courts were false and absolutely without merit," said E. Pierce Marshall.

"Claims by Smith's attorneys that they lost on a legal technicality and will have grounds for an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court are wishful thinking," said Marshall. "The 9th Circuit ruling is clear that the federal courts which heard this case never had jurisdiction. This is a fundamental principle of law and hardly a technicality. Thus any conclusions the federal courts drew after abbreviated hearings in which we were not permitted to present any witnesses are completely invalid."

"Claims that the 9th circuit did not rule on the merits of the case is another attempt by Smith's attorney to misrepresent the facts and the law," Marshall said. "The only court to hear the merits of the case was the Texas Probate Court, which after a 95 day trial and 40 witnesses (the vast majority of whom were never allowed to testify for the defense in the two federal court hearings) ruled against every one of Smith's claims. There is little doubt that had a California jury heard the case they would have reached the same logical conclusion based on the evidence."

"Fabricated claims that documents were forged, withheld or destroyed or that anyone interfered with my father's long-held wishes for the disposition of his property before or after his death are now dead," said Marshall. "In 2001 a Texas jury didn't believe them after a 95-day trial and the 9th Circuit didn't find them credible either."

"We fully expect Anna Nicole's bevy of contingency fee lawyers and hangers on to claim that they will continue to pursue appeals. However, our attorneys tell us that the 9th Circuit and Texas Probate Courts are now in complete agreement and there are no material issues which would warrant an appeal to a higher court," Marshall said.

"After 10 years of uncompensated litigation, Anna Nicole's contingency-fee attorneys are still hoping that we will offer them money to make this case go away. From the beginning, this litigation has been a fraudulent attempt to extort money from my father's estate. Also from the beginning, we have stated firmly that we would take this case to the highest court in the land if necessary to protect my father's estate plan. The most recent decisions by the 9th Circuit prove once again that the findings of the Texas jury have been correct all along on the law and on the facts in this case and those who would attempt to upend my father's estate plan for their own selfish interests would not be allowed to prevail," Marshall added.

The losing lawyers representing Smith in the Texas probate case are Tom Alan Cunningham, Richard Zook and Diana E. Marshall. In California, the losers are Howard K. Stern, Philip Boesch and Kent L. Richland of the Greines Martin firm.