Britney: Don't Leave Home Without It!

196. Hopefully, she can regain her self esteem, self confidence, and most all joint custody of those two precious little boys so she can be an integral part of their lives - they are the most precious gift of all. Bella

Posted at 7:16PM on Mar 11th 2008 by Bella

Amen!

Posted at 9:33PM on Mar 11th 2008 by britaculous

197. Oh, I see that Eardley filed in state court. Same result, though -- it's going to be trown out. Got LOL about Sands' statement that EArdley has offered an olive branch -- sort of like waving a white flag of surrender as you're marched at gunpoint to the POW camp!!!

Posted at 9:33PM on Mar 11th 2008 by lawdawg

198. lol - yea. he likes that phrase! He used that to describe either himself of Lutfi some time back.
Oh well, maybe then this waste of time will mean he has to pay fees etc. But since he works from his "mother-in-laws" house, they probably won't see a cent. Maybe this time - since the fed court rules as in the previous case - he will have some form of sanctions imposed on him. It's silly. You'd think if it were for publicity it may have been over by now. No mention of the victim/witness intimidation, or fraud etc!!
Lutfi's defence is going to be just as silly. Maybe Sands is writing his first fiction novel?!

Posted at 9:43PM on Mar 11th 2008 by britaculous

199. Bella: Returning to the question of why Jamie was appointed, section 1812 of the California Probate Code actually sets forth the order of preference regarding whom the court is to appoint. If the conservatee is an adult who is unmarried and does not have "domestic partner" or an adult child, the court is supposed to appoint a parent.

Hey everyone, I'm taking bets on who shows up at Monday's hearing to represent Sam Lutfi on the restraining order. My money's on the infamous Mr. Eardley.

Posted at 11:01PM on Mar 11th 2008 by lawdawg

200. Maybe Sands is writing his first fiction novel?!

Posted at 9:43PM on Mar 11th 2008 by britaculous

***************************

HA HA HA! Too bad Grisham beat him to the title "The Client."

Posted at 11:26PM on Mar 11th 2008 by lawdawg

201. Man. It isn't what you think it is, that fame thing.

Brian

Posted at 3:26AM on Mar 12th 2008 by Brian Evans

202. Goetz made Jamie and Wallet temporary coconservators of Britney's estate on Feb. 1, the day after she was hospitalized for psychological evaluation at UCLA Medical Center, and then last week extended the arrangement until at least July 31.

In addition to the conservatorship as a whole, Eardley is appealing its prolongation, maintaining the Mar. 5 unscheduled hearing was "conducted in secrecy and without notice of counsel."

He's also looking to reverse Goetz's approval last week of a $2,500 weekly stipend for Jamie and $58,000 in attorney's fees for Britney's court-appointed attorney, Samuel Ingham—both sums that will come out of Britney's estimated $100 million fortune.

Posted at 3:25AM on Mar 12th 2008 by soolespi

203. Hi lawdawg / britaculous: At the age of 26, Spears has approximately 50-54 years ahead of her - a long time. Funds can easily evaporate due to her spending, and disinterest in being "hands on" re contracts, money, etc. I said what I did because she rebels when being "told" what to do. An example: her response to authority and the legal system - repeated defiance. Funds generated through royalties: perfume, Jive Records, etc., can be protected and maintained provided she "accepts" professional advice and "allows" them to protect her monetary assets. Obviously, income from royalties are key since she hasn't generated much income lately.

As I understand the reporting, she wasn't thrilled about her father's appointment. While this allowed the family to intervene and help her medically, it has also helped father/daughter to mend fences as long as she is open to "acceptance". Hopefully, after this is over, she will continue a positive relationship with both parents. What I am stuck on is the $10K/month. How can someone spend $2500/week "EACH" week? It's understandable if part of this reimburses him for out of pocket expenses, but $2500/week even in CA, an allotment for a rental car when he could drive one of hers, and time re negotiations with various people rubs me wrong. Just because the ruling was made, and funds offered, doesn't mean you take it, especially when it is instinctive for a parent to help their child whether they have money or not. There are a lot of parents that would do all of this without payment to save their child's life. I hope this particular phase of the intervention does not affect whatever progress they have made in their relationship - that she won't become defensive towards him due to money.

I guess after this saga, and all the millions spent on lawyers hired to assist her in their specialty fields (divorce law, contract law, entertainment law, hopefully real estate law to keep her from renting at $35K / month!), CPAs, and others, she will write a biography, which Hollywood will make into a movie, and she will not only recoup these expenses, but be set for life! Bella

Posted at 12:49PM on Mar 12th 2008 by Bella

204. Bella, it is "value-based" compensation, and the baseline is not what Jamie could be making as a cook or chef or whatever, but what the value is to the estate in comparison to what fiduciaries of comparable-sized estates are paid. The compensation that a fiduciary receives is taxable income, so $2500 is gross, not net. It is subject to self-employment tax at 15.5% on the first $100K, so a total conservative tax rate on the income of an unmarried person residing in California is going to be about 34%. That works out to $1650/week after tax, which isn't really a lot considering that rent on a modest home in LA is about $4000/mo.

In the short run, all the professional fees simply look to us, as outsiders, like they are depleting the income. In the long run, however, as to the conservators, co-trustees, accountants and attorneys working on the record contracts and endorsement deals will actually result in savings and/or contribute value to the estate. Some fees, such as fees to defend the audit, would have been unavoidable in any event.

If Brit can get her act together, especially while interest in her life is a hot commodity, she would see a handsome profit from selling the rights for a made-for-TV movie or an autobiography like Bertinelli's. I think the market for her story will begin to cool down in a year or so. The supreme irony, and a sad one, is that recovering her mental health and engaging in less outrageous conduct will actaully de-value Brit's story. Hope she focuses on her health for the best reasons -- herself and her children.

Posted at 4:34PM on Mar 12th 2008 by lawdawg

205. Oh, and BTW, the rental car is for the security staff, not Jamie. Some other sites made this more clear. TMZ did not report it because the story would be less sensational if it were known that Jamie is not benefitting.

Posted at 4:39PM on Mar 12th 2008 by lawdawg

206. lawdawg: Thanks for the informative response. You are smart - you should work at Bryan Cave aka the "Cave" as we refer to it!! Unfortunately, she brought a lot of this on herself - not only the monetary expense it's costing, but more importantly, emotionally missing so much of her young children's lives and memories. Children create new adventures each day, and no amount of money can recapture or buy back time. I have never been a fan of Spears, but do hope, as you and others do, she can regain her health permanently, get back to being a mom, and continue a positive relationship with her folks. All the other stuff will follow. Bella.

Posted at 6:08PM on Mar 12th 2008 by Bella

207. Lawdawg - The Client - lol - he wishes he could write like Grisham, right?!


Bella - you're right. She does have a hand in all this. If you see/read old interviews of her - even 2006 - you can barely recognise that girl as the Britney we have seen in the last 6 months! Sad, really.
Various stresses impact on us - even years after they happen. And sometimes we are just too blind, or stubborn to acknolwedge the impact they have on our lives until it's too late... Sometimes we don't have the right people around us to guide us to we make things worse.
It's not an excuse for a parent. I agree that her boys are where her main focus should be. And it's entirely ironic that the one thing she was trying to avoid/get around (attending psych evals) is going to happen without her permission!

Posted at 11:30AM on Mar 13th 2008 by britaculous

208. Lawdawg. 3/10 docs: http://www.pagesix.com/story/britney+s+lawyers+million+dollar+fees
It says respodent (Kvin's side?) oral motion denied on the financial issues. Kev was sowrn in. ? What doesn that mean?
What's the injunctive order about?

Posted at 12:09PM on Mar 13th 2008 by britaculous

209. britaculous: The minute entry is a record made by the courtroom clerk of the matters that were taken up by the commissioner at the hearing - sort of like minutes of a meeting. "Respondent is sworn" means that Kevin was sworn in, in case he was asked questions and would be giving testimony. "Respondent's oral motion pursuant to Section 214 F.C. is denied with regard to the hearing on financial issues" -- Translation: Kevin's attorney requested the court to close the hearing during the discussion of the financial matters -- the attorneys' fees issue. Section 214 of the Family Code provides:

"214. Except as otherwise provided in this code or by court rule,
the court may, when it considers it necessary in the interests of
justice and the persons involved, direct the trial of any issue of
fact joined in a proceeding under this code to be private, and may
exclude all persons except the officers of the court, the parties,
their witnesses, and counsel."

The court denied the motion, and that is how the argument by Stacy Phillips came to be reported in the press. See, the next entry states that the attorneys fees issue was argued.

Next, the Court, on its own motion, closed the hearing under Section 214 for the argument on the custody and visitation issues, and the hearing continued in closed session.

Then, housekeeping matters were addressed -- hearing dates, deadline for custody evaluation to be completed and "served" -- copies to counsel, "Deposition transcripts lodged by counsel for petitioner on March 7, 2008 are ordered sealed." This means that Phillips offered transcripts of several depositions to the court as evidence supporting her argument. The court agreed to keep them under seal, probably because they include Qs and As about custody and visitation, finances, etc, that the whole world does not need to see. "Counsel are ordered to complete redactions" - the attorneys have to designate what they want to be redacted from the transcripts.

Next, the court indicates it is taking the attorneys fees matter under advisement -- the commissioner wants to review line-by-line the time entries and costs, in light of the argument heard. This means there will be some fee-slashing. Finally, the transcript of the part of the hearing that was closed is order to be sealed (makes sense, doesn't it?), and only the attorneys are allowed to receive copies from the court reporter.

Posted at 1:05PM on Mar 13th 2008 by lawdawg

210. Okay, to continue. The "injunctive order" was one of several matters on the docket -- the "agenda" of the hearing, so to speak. Each request made of the court is set for a hearing, and several matters were scheduled to be heard on Monday. They are all listed at the top of the minute entry. One of these matters was a request filed last November 16 for some sort of injunctive relief -- without seeing the petition for order to show cause, I really can't say what that's about, but I can speculate. Either Britney or Kevin -- probably Kevin -- had sought to enjoin something related to custody/visitation. Maybe something about holiday arrangements, maybe something about telephone contact, maybe seeking to enjoin one of the parents from making disparaging remarks about the other, who knows. The court did not enter any order enjoining anything, so the whole thing might have been mooted in the time between November and March.

Posted at 1:17PM on Mar 13th 2008 by lawdawg