Big Decision By Florida Judge In Stern vs OQuinn
A 65 page decision was rendered by Magistrate Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum in the Florida Southern District Court lawsuit that Howard K. Stern filed against Houston Texas attorney John O’Quinn and his law firm on various pending motions. The suit was filed by Stern alleging defamation by O’Quinn concerning statements that he made to media outlets after the death of Anna Nicole Smith while in representation of Anna Nicole’s mother Virgie Arthur.
In his statements, Stern alleges that O’Quinn made statements conveying that Stern murdered Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel Smith for financial gain. Also alleged was Stern kidnapped Anna Nicole’s infant daughter Dannielynn for the purpose of ransoming her to Larry Birkhead.
The decisions mostly address O’Quinn investigator Don Clark who is retired as an FBI bureau chief and investigator Wilma Vicedomine. O’Quinn’s reliance on statements that he made with information allegedly supplied by the investigators was at issue.
There were several assertions in motions by Stern that were tellingly were not challenged by O’Quinn giving the impression of truism concerning some of O’Quinn’s statements believing they would hold up under scrutiny.
The court found that investigative efforts and information obtained after the alleged statements were made to be of “little relevance”.
The court concluded that limited information culled by investigators and used by O’Quinn will be made available to Stern but only information received before O’Quinn’s last public statement made through March 27th, 2007. Information supplied to Rita Cosby would be open to inspection whether or not she used it in her book, “Blonde Ambition”. Vicedomine will reveal postings she made on the internet and the pseudonyms she used as the information is already public and not subject to work-product protection.
Rosenbaum wrote:
Stern is however not entitled to any work product that occurred after O’Quinn’s statements were made. Stern can employ interrogatories to learn identities of all people with info regarding the truth or falsity of particular allegations in O’Quinn’s statements and then conduct his own interviews and discovery. Allowing Stern to review O’Quinn’s post-statement investigation to provide a short cut for Stern to prepare his case does not amount to substantial need.
As for the need of investigative materials to prove actual malice, the court said there are other ways of obtaining evidence regarding such a claim such as the O’Quinn Materials and Investigation Materials generated through March 27, 2007.
Rosenbaum made an exception though prohibiting any information given to the FBI or Florida Attorney General by Clark. That information would not be available to the public and will not be disclosed.
O’Quinn successfully argued that “any waiver (of work product privilege) must be limited to the information actually disclosed and not the entire subject matter “allegedly” discussed.”
Both Clark and Vicedomine will be deposed at an undisclosed date. However deposition subject matter will be limited for Stern’s attorney Lin Wood. According to the document, the Judge was very specific in what could be addressed.
One issue that was left up in the air was the conflict of investigator work-product protection concerning Virgie Arthur’s lawsuit in Houston Texas against Howard K. Stern alleging defamation and conspiracy to defame in both Federal and State courts. The Court said “Arthur’s work-product protection is not at issue before this Court at this time.”…”Thus the Court makes no determination regarding the viability of any work product protection Arthur may have as to these materials.”
An important thing to remember is that it has not been disclosed in Cosby’s book who gave her what information. Nor is there any way to tell who posted what on the internet. In the Cosby case, most information remains under seal.
Rosenbaum:
Indeed in the Blonde Ambition Litigation, Cosby and Hachette list Vicedomine in their Initial Disclosures as an individual likely to have discoverable information. Specifically, the Initial Disclosures state that Vicedomine has information regarding the “truth of statements in Blonde Ambition, fact refuting Mr. Sterns allegation of fault, [and] Mr. Stern’s conduct and reputation.”
Lin Wood’s motion for attorney fees has been denied.
Rosenbaum found “both parties presented their respective arguments in good faith and that a genuine dispute existed regarding the discoverability of the materials sought. For these reasons, the Court declines to award attorney fees to either Plaintiff or Defendants in this matter”.
In relation to these decisions, Stern filed a “Memorandum of Law in Opposition To Defendants Motion For Immediate Appeal”. O’Quinn filed “Motion To Strike Stern’s Unauthorized Opposition Response To Defendant’s Motion”. O’Quinn’s “Motion To Strike” was granted.
* Also tonight Howard K. Stern filed more lawsuits. He is suing Mark Speers, former Larry Birkhead bodyguard and Jackie Hatten who both were quoted in Rita Cosby’s book, “Blonde Ambition”.
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:03 am
Check this out. Someone posted their response to my post before my post was posted. rofl Look like some of that TMZ magic!
24. I thought TMZ kicked you off their site. Must be using someone elses computer tonight. Howard has won each and ever case he has gone after. O’Quinn now is on the run. Virgie didn’t get the baby and the money thank our Dear God….Now it’s time for Jackie the pig to cough up some money for Attorney fees. And she can try and explain how she saw Howard with Larry when she never was in that home where Anna lived. She and Virgie got together to started a rummor about them being gay so Virgie could get Dannielynn. Then Jackie and Virgie feed lies to Rita book which Rita has admitted to. Now Rita will be next due in court to try and say , I didn’t check my facts bescause O’Quinn said it was all true and I was working for O’Quinn. This is a great day for Howard and Larry the puzzle is coming together. The public will soon find out the conspircy Quinn and TX group was doing. Now Lin Woods get to depose Wilma Vice and Don Clark. Quinn fought like hell for that to not happen, but Woods won. The games will begin…..And Woods will win the jack pot….
Posted at 12:59AM on Sep 3rd 2008 by Ms Marples on nutcase
25. Victim? HUMPH! Is his name on the label Howard K Stern, Victim? Is he the executor of the Will and Victim? Does he wear Anna Nicole paid for victim shoes? Is his latest job…Victim?
Has he gone from a one-dead-woman-client lawyer to a I-am-a-victim lawyer?
You are going o have to work long and hard to paint this man as a victim! I do not think anyone on the face of the earth will ever look at this man as a victim! Victims do not enable their clients to death with drugs in their name. IMO
IMO As all of my post past and present are…IMO! Mr. Victim Lawsuit Stern wants to sue the world trying to convince us he is a victim. IMO IMO IMO not buying it IMO
Posted at 1:00AM on Sep 3rd 2008 by Mrs Marple
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:05 am
Hey Mrs. I copied your comment to this post. Wow!! That is bizarre!!! Sounds like they set a trap!
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:14 am
Good let the courts get it over with, then they can stop with the WILMA WILMA WILMA stuff and we can move on.
Wilma to my knowledge was not the one carrying the duffle bag of drugs around.
I want to hear it from the courts not the blogs or websites.
Now, this maybe where the next article comes in. Share and compare of IP’s. IT IS ILLEGAL!
Did they or would they hand over people’s IP’s without a court order?
We will see. I hope some proof as to the “numerous internet people” that Wilma divulged information to. How does Stern know if it was Wilma who posted information? Anyone could post using Wilma’s name, especially at TMZ. This comes back to information of someone checking IPs without a court order and I am sure will be helpful to Virgie’s case
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:53 am
Looks like maybe Howie is losing the Rita suit and is filing now against her witnesses! I wonder why he hasn’t filed suit against Larry? Some of the stuff reported by Jackie and Mark has been stated to the media by Larry himself. That must have been one hell of a deal that came out of the backroom meeting…you know, the one where Rale had his pants on so he left?
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:58 am
Carole Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:53 am
Looks like maybe Howie is losing the Rita suit and is filing now against her witnesses! I wonder why he hasn’t filed suit against Larry? Some of the stuff reported by Jackie and Mark has been stated to the media by Larry himself. That must have been one hell of a deal that came out of the backroom meeting…you know, the one where Rale had his pants on so he left?
************************
California leads the nation in anti-SLAPP laws and they will not put up with filing lawsuits in order to silence people.
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:05 pm
If IPs and other personal information was requested or turned over and used without a subpeona being sought and issued, I will not hesistate to investigate all legal remedies available - just for the principle of it.
Those who are officer of the court have a higher responsibilty to respect all the the laws.
Believe me, I’m about through messing around with this nonsense.
Sometimes you have to be willing to put your money where your mouth is and I’m there and my family agrees that the time is lost past due.
This stuff is bigger than a few bloggers and this story.
Want to talk about “Free Speech” on the internet. Maybe lawsuits are all these yahoos understand.
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 pm
am wondering if Stern is going to sue everyone on John O’ Quinn’s witness list so that they would be to afraid to tell what they know?
Once again just inquest in my opinion strategy is used.
NOW THAT IS THE REAL CHILLING EFFECT!
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
They think because it worked in some Third World Country during the Inquest, that it will work now. But I believe that it is not going to. Hatten and Speers are California Residents. California has very strict anti-Slapp legislation.
As for Larry, hard to sue Rita when he was a source.
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
einy Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
They think because it worked in some Third World Country during the Inquest, that it will work now. But I believe that it is not going to. Hatten and Speers are California Residents. California has very strict anti-Slapp legislation.
As for Larry, hard to sue Rita when he was a source.
*******************
In My Opinion, Stern and Woods MO is to use the court systems to silence people? We will see.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:12 pm
I agree, Kerry. I know we’ve all talked about why Larry Sue didn’t file suit against Rita when Howie Sue filed. It would have been the logical thing to do. He was a source, lol. I’ll bet that sticks in Howie craw. It’s nice to know that CA won’t put up this this bull.
As for the other ruling, it’s nice to know the judge more or less told Woodie to do his own work rather than use someone elses. And it’s hilarious that many have used Wilma’s name or some dirivitive thereof in our own postings. They will almost HAVE to identify them by IP’s, and the question is which server are you going to subpeona…all of them?
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Carole Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:12 pm
I agree, Kerry. I know we’ve all talked about why Larry Sue didn’t file suit against Rita when Howie Sue filed. It would have been the logical thing to do. He was a source, lol. I’ll bet that sticks in Howie craw. It’s nice to know that CA won’t put up this this bull.
As for the other ruling, it’s nice to know the judge more or less told Woodie to do his own work rather than use someone elses. And it’s hilarious that many have used Wilma’s name or some dirivitive thereof in our own postings. They will almost HAVE to identify them by IP’s, and the question is which server are you going to subpeona…all of them?
************************
Carol, if you remember Art and Rose both said they have our IP’s now if in fact they were handed over to a officer of the court with our locations and names without subpoena’s then that is illegal. TMZ told me in an email that I saved that they do not share IP’s with other people so who is sharing and who is comparing and where they turned over without going through the proper channels of the law?
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
As Officers of the Court, if Mr. Wood or Ms. Barth requested the IPs of individuals effectively circumventing the law to obtain them or if they received that information and subsequently used it - I wonder if the people whose Constitutional Rights would have violated - can actually hold the lawyers themselves accountable.
I think there are some very substantial issues of constitutional law at question here.
What do you guys think?
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:32 pm
einy Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
As Officers of the Court, if Mr. Wood or Ms. Barth requested the IPs of individuals effectively circumventing the law to obtain them or if they received that information and subsequently used it - I wonder if the people whose Constitutional Rights would have violated - can actually hold the lawyers themselves accountable.
I think there are some very substantial issues of constitutional law at question here.
What do you guys think?
**********************
I think that if indeed these people did this without going through proper channels of the law, then there are HUGE issues and laws were broken.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm
I honestly do not like the fact that my IP was harvested? I was told it is what hackers use to get into your computer. I think more attention should be brought out about this.
I also think that these people did, in my opinion anything they could to scare us into silence.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:46 pm
That site is breaking a lot of laws I think. The IPs I think are only a part of the big picture here (but a great portion of it.) I won’t mention any names but some have really gone over the edge with this. It’s hard to believe too that Virgie still gets villified by that group still too.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
You know anonymous I Never threaten crap on internet site but I swear to God if those criminals did what I’m being told they did, then I will not hesitate to go before a court of law and stand up for the principle of free speech. Not for one second, I don’t care what it cost or who gets dragged into this mess, because it is wrong. PERIOD
I think that the courts will be happy to have a case like this so that the law in this area can be clarified.
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:56 pm
einy Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
You know anonymous I Never threaten crap on internet site but I swear to God if those criminals did what I’m being told they did, then I will not hesitate to go before a court of law and stand up for the principle of free speech. Not for one second, I don’t care what it cost or who gets dragged into this mess, because it is wrong. PERIOD
I think that the courts will be happy to have a case like this so that the law in this area can be clarified.
*************************
They were trying to scare us into silence and it did not work.
I truly believe that.
They went through Wilma’s garbage as a “Hey we know where you live?” Who does that type of thing and then Art promised to describe it’s content on his site? SCARE TACTIC at its best. Shameful people
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Einy, that’s an excellent point. The law has to be clarified in this manner because from my perspective a lot of people are getting hurt over their baloney (and scared too due to the threats and stalking among other things.) Harvesting IPs IMO is another dangerous act due to who knows what hands these are landing into.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Anonymous,
All I want is for people who participate in this to come forward and tell the truth. Using the courts is the last resort to uncovering this nonsense. But if they refuse to do so and continue with the lying then I will not hesitate to do so.
I’m not a person that makes empty and pointless threats. This in no way should be interpreted as such. I’m am a person that is willing to do what I need to in order to protect my right and the rights of others when it comes to issue as important as this.
Truth
That’s all we’ve asked for. Those that continue to engage in and cover up this behavior - I have sympathy for them.
I’m done with this nonsense. They should not have engaged in this behavior, period and they owe those of us whose constitutional rights they so carelessly disregarded the truth about what happened, who requested the information and where it ultimately ended up.
They do not get to make those decisions.
We believe that the people involved are “Criminals” we believe that the people involved have very shady pasts and are involved in activities that are immoral and illegal.
That’s what we believe, so to think then that our information would be so easily turned over to people like that, well it defies common sense.
What if we’re right and they’re wrong.
What if they very people that they thought they were helping turn out to be the type of people that we believe they are?
Would you want those kinds of character knowing anything about you?
That’s why the law is in place. Because an impartial court should be making these decisions not some uneducated idiot with hero worship. Not some mentally disturbed woman who can’t leave her house, wears and collar of ownership and thinks it’s allright to be “punished” as a form of love.
I do not want some one like that circumventing the law because She or anyone else thinks they know better what should happen.
Sorry, ain’t gonna’ fly.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:32 pm
I meant I have no sympathy for them.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
einy Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:32 pm
I meant I have no sympathy for them.
**********************
I have a little sympathy for them because I know how you are and just how far you will go.
I think if you can prove this then go for it!
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Im still waiting.
I want to know how rose got my Ip.
Mishme Says:
August 30th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Could someone tell me how
A. I was a member of two sites(QV’S and Arts) using my real name and email addy.
B. I was a member of one site(Roses) using another email addy and different user name. Not once did I post I just read.
and the site(B) knew who I was.
HOW COULD THAT BE?
Did someone share my ip?
I know QV would not share that with Rose or any of her moderators.
So that leaves????
OR
Someone from Roses knew of ips and who they belonged to from QV’s old site and shared them with Rose and co.
Either way………
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Mish,
This is exactly the type of behavior we are talking about. Of course they shared information with each other.
That’s step one.
Step two: Did they then forward that information to others.
There’s where the real heart of the matter lies.
If they did, was it requested.
For what purpose was this information being obtained.
How did they expect to make use of it?
This is the Truth that I was referring to.
Mish,
Many people have given us ample information that these things were indeed shared amongst site owners.
Next step
Why, For Who etc..
We promise that we are going to publically tell everyone everything that we find out so that people can make their own decision as to what they wish to do about it.
September 3rd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
This was a huge decision by the judge. Obviously she put a lot of thought into it with 65 pages clearly outlining what Woody, Barf and co. can have access to. Also the attorneys came to agreements themselves about the privilege logs a few weeks ago. Woody asked for things he clearly was not entitled to and got shot down… I have more to say but gotta go make more coffee…lol!!
September 3rd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Oh..before I go Mish. Of course you know how they got your IP and I can guarantee it was not from me. I know you are a member of Art Harris forum. He was intimidating people about IP’s and so was Rose who chose IP’s and was able to put names to them even though they were not members of her site or known to her in any way shape or form and called site visitors “shameful hackers”. She must have gotten a charge out of the “shameful” part which p’d me off for associating ALL OF US who made the “wall” with BDSM lingo. Hackers was bad enough. Hacking is a crime..that no one committed. I have more about that too but java is calling me..
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
QV Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Oh..before I go Mish. Of course you know how they got your IP and I can guarantee it was not from me. I know you are a member of Art Harris forum. He was intimidating people about IP’s and so was Rose who chose IP’s and was able to put names to them even though they were not members of her site or known to her in any way shape or form and called site visitors “shameful hackers”. She must have gotten a charge out of the “shameful” part which p’d me off for associating ALL OF US who made the “wall” with BDSM lingo. Hackers was bad enough. Hacking is a crime..that no one committed. I have more about that too but java is calling me..
*********************
They really are one sorry sad bunch!
Hacking, I say HA HA to that, I just learned how to use my ATM card the right way.
I did not know what an IP was until I was threatened by Art and someone told me Rose was displaying my IP, Name, Location like I gave to the Jerry Lewis Telethon over there.
Honestly, these people are insane.
Just one question for Art:
Did you get Leon’s IP when after the court documents were given to you?
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Rose made up the “hacking” crap to justify illegally displaying IP information.
If she was “hacked” then the proper and legal course is to turn the information over to the proper authorities.
But Rose thinks she gets to be judge, jury and executioner.
But when you can’t even decide when you can get out of the corner, I guess you don’t have any idea where the bounderies are.
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:21 pm
The question to ask yourself is, “Where is Stern the most vulnerable?” The biggest potential indictment Stern will face is double homicide. There isn’t one decision that Stern’s team makes that isn’t, in some way, a preemptive strike against the murder charges.
Where will most of the evidence come from that will lay the way for the DA in California to go forward with his indictments? Right now, it appears to be Virgie Arthur’s defamation suit against Stern.
Stern’s team is laying the foundation for witness discreditably in the event a murder indictment is in the shoot.
Discrediting Virgie Arthur is at the top of their list and they are trying to do that with Wilma and bloggers.
Every other potential witness that could inform a jury about Stern’s behaviors and motivations are now the targets of Stern’s team. Jackie Hatten, Mark Speer are among the first in a long list of witnesses that we will see or have seen named in suits. Every time someone talks, either through a deposition or otherwise, it’s all the more Stern’s team can use to buttress their client, even though it means having to twist, misconstrue, and manipulate the testimony offered in depositions.
Stern’s team is desperate and they will go to extremes to protect their client. They won’t stop in their pursuit to find anyone who may even offer the minutest shred of evidenciary hope they can use to help Stern achieve a victory in the long-term: to beat a murder rap.
The immediate goal, of course, is to destroy Virgie Arthur’s case and they’re going to try to use bloggers to do it. This case isn’t about the deaths of Anna and Daniel. It’s always been about the Marshall fortune. I don’t think Stern and company ever expected the deaths of Anna and Daniel would set off a chain reaction of major proportions. They underestimated the power of the public on the Internet. They thought by controlling the media and Internet outlets that they could stifle those of us who cried out for justice. Weren’t they in for a surprise?
Should we begin to panic? Are we in some sort of trouble? Are Stern’s people going to start coming after bloggers in order to destroy Virgie’s case?
Absolutely not. We are all in a good place. Virgie’s case is sound. Whether it’s God, Fate or Karma, good souls are always rewarded because of their good deeds. Our hearts and our souls are in this for all the right reasons. Be strong, keep the faith, and always know the Good are the victors.
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:34 pm
The public will soon find out the conspircy Quinn and TX group was doing.
Posted at 12:59AM on Sep 3rd 2008 by Ms Marples on nutcase
………………………….
This is from the post to Mrs. quoted in the first slot above.
You can safely toss the rest of the person’s quote away as empty tripe because of the one line I allowed to remain.
This poster’s argument is solely based on the premise that there has been a conspiracy among those who are not supportive of Stern.
The poster’s premise is hogwash. I think if we were involved in a conspiracy to commit something (the poster fails to say what we’ve all conspired to accomplish), we would know about it.
All I know is that they love to throw the conspiracy accusation at us now that they know there is such a thing. And they only know such a thing exists because their ring leader (et al.) has been accused of it.
Garbage in, garbage out.
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:52 pm
I think it was a major shock when so many of us stood up and were not afraid to say….something is very wrong with the picture Howie is paintig. I assume Howard thought that most Americans were like him….caring only for himself and how little he needs to do to be comfortable well off. He didn’t think anyone would care about a quiet, shy young man whos mother was a promiscuous drug addict. He thought we wouldn’t care if this addicted person overdosed. He obviously thought it would be a 60 day news item and then we would move on.
We are his worst nightmare next to Virgie, O’Quinn and McCabe. We won’t forget, and we won’t back down. We will not turn our backs on a maligned mother and grandmother who is fighting to bring the truth to light, and light a fire under homicide investigators, IMO.
Does anyone wonder why Lin Wood is not Howards attorney in the Speer/Hatten matter?
September 3rd, 2008 at 10:48 pm
QV Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Oh..before I go Mish. Of course you know how they got your IP and I can guarantee it was not from me.
******************
Of course I know it was not you.
September 4th, 2008 at 6:10 am
Targets Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:21 pm e
The question to ask yourself is, “Where is Stern the most vulnerable?” The biggest potential indictment Stern will face is double homicide. There isn’t one decision that Stern’s team makes that isn’t, in some way, a preemptive strike against the murder charges.
—————————————
Utterly amazing that Stern would sue witnesses at this time in the game. I will be anxious to see how this is handled by McCabe and team in relation to the other suits. Someone on Topix said that Woody is not in the suit yet but he and Barf will be asking for pro hac vice because the suit is in Los Angeles. As many saw Howie state numerous times, he would not sue Hatten because she has no money. Wonder what changed? What does he want from her? Does she even live there anymore?
I think its excellent that Virgie and her family have stayed out of the press. Less to be bashed about. They sing the same old song. They insult her appearance or anything else. I love the one where they complain that Virgie should sue Larry for visitation. If she did, they would be on fire with anger and insults. Yes… Virgie is being smart. Let it play out in the courts. Let the judges see the Los Angeles suits for what they are. Plain and simple harassment.
September 4th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Is either or both Speers and Jackie on Rita’s witness list? If they are could he have filed a lawsuit against them so that they could not be witnesses in Rita’s trial or if they remain witnesses Woody can try to discredit any of their testimony saying it is biased because they themselves are being sued by Howard?