With extensions granted and apparent problems with settlement terms agreed to, the late Anna Nicole Smith’s attorney Howard K. Stern has settled his defamation lawsuit against Houston Texas attorney John O’Quinn.

O’Quinn represents the late Anna Nicole Smith’s mother, Virgie Arthur. During and after hearings in Florida to decide Anna Nicole’s final resting place, O’Quinn went on various television shows and implied that Stern was responsible for the death of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel.

A prior announcement one month ago on October 30th, 2008 that the lawsuit was settled led to speculation that the terms may not have been too fruitful for Stern because settlement negotiations were officially postponed due to Florida Attorney Robert Klein having the flu. The negotiations did take place after all on the date that Judge Dimitrouleas had postponed. And there was no public statement from Stern.

The negotiations were allowed to continue until today, December 1st when the “Stipulation For Entry of Dismissal With Prejudice” and “Final Order of Dismissal” was filed.

The only terms revealed are that certain pages of a deposition given by O’Quinn investigator and consultant Don Clark dated October 14th, 2008, will no longer be confidential. The terms of the settlement are “strictly confidential” and neither party is permitted to comment except to say “the matter has been amicably resolved”.

120108_Stern_vs_OQuinn_248_settled.pdf
120108_Stern_vs_OQuinn_249_settled.pdf

Share This

Sort of but not really.

This dispute concerns the personal papers and photographs of Coretta Scot King who died in 2006. Two of the children of the late Dr. Martin Luther King and his wife Coretta are refusing to provide a biographer with those materials saying their mother did not want author Barbara Reynolds to write a biography about her. The third sibling, Dexter King who is the executor of his fathers estate says his siblings, the Rev. Bernice King and Martin Luther King III and his mother signed control of their intellectual property over to their father’s estate.

Attorneys for both sides say money is the main dispute but they differ on who is to blame for the problems.

For the full story, read the New York Times recent article concerning the controversy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/books/14bio.htmlколи под наем

As of the date of publication of this article, another client of Wood’s, Howard K. Stern had tentatively settled his defamation lawsuit against Houston Texas Attorney John O’Quinn. O’Quinn suggested on nation television that Stern was responsible for the deaths of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel Smith. However no settlement papers have been filed in the Florida Southern District Federal court.

Presiding Judge Dimitrouleas filed an order for Stern to file a joint stipulation for dismissal or show cause why a joint stipulation has not been filed on or before November 19th, 2008 leaving onlookers of the case to speculate as to why Stern has not followed through on the declared settlement.

Share This

Now that Howard K Sterns defamation lawsuit against Houston attorney John O’Quinn is tentatively settled, it appears the wheels will start turning in Virgie Arthur’s defamation lawsuit against Howard K. Stern and CBS Studios in the Southern District Court in Houston Texas.

There has been a protective order issued by Judge Lee H Rosenthal in the case, just as there has been in all the other cases that have arisen out of the tragic death of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel.

One of the sections of the order says “confidential information shall not be used for purposes other than in connection with this case”. However, we saw Rita Cosby in New York who is also being sued by Howard K. Stern, freely hand over her deposition as well as those of investigators Don Clark and Wilma Vice to the Florida case.

Howard K. Stern was the only person who objected to having his deposition used from the Cosby case and he is the Plaintiff in both cases. Not too long after, the Florida case is tentatively settled. Could the same happen here?

Protective order: 110408_Arthur_vs_Stern_CBS_100.pdf

In the same case, Federal Correctional Institution inmate Jonathan Riches was denied a request to join in Mrs. Arthurs suit: 110508_Arthur_vs_Stern_CBS_98.pdf

And here is a copy of the docket for this case: Arthur_vs_Stern_et_al_Federal_Docket.html

Share This

Regarding the defamation suit of Howard K. Stern vs John O’Quinn. With an extension of time granted to Texas attorney John O’Quinn re a mediation hearing that was to happen on October 30th, quite a few people following this case were surprised to wake up this morning to see the mediation did indeed go forward on the previously scheduled day and the case was settled!

So far the details are confidential and are not expected to be published. The question around the internet is which party wanted to settle? Readers remember that the lead attorney for John O’Quinn in this case, Richard Klein, was forced to file a motion to reschedule the customary mediation hearing due to a bad case of the flu. Howard K. Stern’s co-counsel, Krista Barth was asked for the courtesy of extending the mediation and she refused, forcing Klein to file the motion. The extension was granted by Magistrate Judge Robin Rosenbaum.

As I was reading the chatter about this case on a Topix forum, I came to a post by an alert blogger stating that Lin Wood’s firm Powell Goldstein LLP who represents Howard K. Stern is being sold. This link to the Atlanta Business Chronicle was given. “Powell Goldstein to Sell to St. Louis Firm”.

Everyone will draw their own conclusions concerning the urgency to settle and the willingness of O’Quinn’s reps to attend a mediation that was already rescheduled by the judge. With the announcement of the sale of  POGO Law under dire circumstances, I know what I think about it. And it makes me wonder who got the short end of the stick in this deal.

********

Motion requesting court for relief of obligation to produce defendants financial records and proposed order.

103108_Stern_vs_OQuinn_243-2.pdf
103108_Stern_vs_OQuinn_243.pdf

Share This

The numerous lawsuits arising from the death of Anna Nicole Smith are all moving forward. Notable is that most of these suits have protection orders in place for at least a year and a half so the public will have to wait to see some of the more supposedly sensational material.

In Howard K. Stern vs Rita Cosby and Hatchette books, investigators Don Clark and Wilma Vicedomine gave depositions. Counsel for Stern in the Florida case of Stern vs O’Quinn requested to use not only those depositions but that of California Private Investigator Jack Harding who says he spoke to Anna Nicole’s son Daniel before his death. Harding says Daniel expressed fear and mistrust of Howard K. Stern’s involvement with his mother. When Daniel died unexpected and tragically in the Bahamas visiting his mother and meeting his newborn sister, Harding’s business card was found in Daniel’s pocket.

O’Quinn offered no objection to the use of those depositions which are protected from public view but Georgia defamation attorney Lin Wood for Stern would not allow Stern’s deposition to be used. Counsel for Rita Cosby also allowed her deposition to be used in Stern vs O’Quinn. Don Clark gave a deposition in Stern vs O’Quinn as well for a total of two that will be looked at in the Florida case.

A customary mediation hearing in Stern vs O’Quinn scheduled for today had to be postponed due to Florida attorney Robert Klein suffering from the flu. A call was made to Sterns counsel Lin Wood that went unanswered so Klein asked co-counsel Krista Barth to reschedule the hearing. She refused to reschedule but an emergency motion to Judge Rosenbaum resulted in the hearing being postponed.

103008_Stern_vs_OQuinn_241.pdf

103008_Stern_vs_OQuinn_240.pdf

November 4th at 4:00pm there will be a status conference in the US District Court case in Houston, Texas of Virgie Arthur vs Howard K. Stern and CBS Studios

And last but not least, a little comic relief in Arthur vs Stern and CBS Studios.

Share This

Don Clark

COUP DE GRÂCE:

DON CLARK’S AFFIDAVIT SAYS IT ALL

Summary: Former FBI special agent Don Clark has submitted into the record an affidavit in which he reveals his findings at the conclusion of an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the deaths of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel. He concludes that Howard K. Stern was “intimately involved” in their deaths. His affidavit and its contents are now part of the legal record, which has been the objective of many, including this writer, who have believed Mr. Stern may have been responsible for the deaths of 39-year-old Smith and her 20-year-old son.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Howard K. Stern attorney Lin Wood requested email communications between freelance reporter Dawna Kaufman and O’Quinn investigators Don Clark and Wilma Vicedomine in the Southern District of Florida defamation case of Stern vs O’Quinn. That motion was denied by Magistrate Judge Robin Rosenbaum.

Stern had argued since some investigative work produced by Clark and Vice was not deemed to be work product because it was shared with third parties, a series of emails between Ms. Kaufman and the investigators should also not be covered under the work product doctrine. After an in camera review of the emails, the Magistrate said those materials are protected and will not be made available to Stern.   Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

John O’Quinn requested a protective order today in defense of Howard K. Stern’s defamation lawsuit against him and The O’Quinn Law Firm in the Southern District of Florida Federal Court.

Counsel for Stern demanded practically everything but the kitchen sink in a financial discovery request. The list is long and includes requests for Federal and State tax returns dating back three years, financial records, property records, appraisals, deeds, mortgages, any personal property including cars, jewelry, boats etc.. whether it is still owned by Mr. O’Quinn or not and if so what it sold for. They also ask for any communications that may have occurred between the “Firm” and the IRS. Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Judge Dimitrouleas ruled today Howard K. Stern’s request for default in his defamation lawsuit against John O’Quinn is denied. The Judge citing case law said default is reserved for only the most “severe sanction” and “appropriate only as a last resort”.

In response to Stern’s accusations of “bad faith” on the part of council for O’Quinn, the Judge mentions that Stern “did not act upon the lack of responsive pleading until the Court prompted him with an Order to Show Cause”.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Default (179): Denied
Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike (183): Denied
Defendant’s Motion for time extension (188) Granted
Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Clerk’s Default (187):Granted

http://annanicoleandhowardkstern.com/092308_Stern_vs_OQuinn_191.pdf

Share This

Howard K. Stern’s reply “in support of motion for entry of default judgment after assessment of damages by a jury and motion to set aside clerk’s default” was filed today in Stern’s defamation lawsuit against Virgie Arthur attorney John O’Quinn.

I must say in reading so many documents in the lawsuits that have been filed since the death of Anna Nicole Smith, this one is the most passionate to date. By passionate, I mean angry. It’s signed by Lin Wood.

Be sure to read 091908_Stern_vs_OQuinn_189.pdf after reading this reply. You will see that there were major disagreements as to what information was discoverable for Stern and what was privileged. O’Quinn says in 189 that the parties had an informal agreement to defer several depositions until after privilege issues were resolved. Meaning, arguments need to be cleared up concerning Stern asking for information covered by attorney work product doctrine. Those arguments eventually were settled by “in camera” inspections by  Judge Rosenbaum in the case of evidence gathered by investigators Don Clark and Wilma Vicedomine.

Now, Stern says that O’Quinn has fought all depo’s except a couple jurisdictional depos. As an observer, I remember depo’s being scheduled several times and then hearing or seeing nothing, wondered why they were not taken.

Anyway, read this rant about the tardiness of the answer to the lawsuit and see what you think. If the default is granted, Stern wants a jury to determine damages to his reputation 

Share This