Michael Jackson’s Law Will & Testament

01 Jul

By USLaw

Hightlights:

Executed in Los Angeles, CA on July 7, 2002.

Stipulates that assets be placed in family trust and that his mother Katherine, or Diana Ross if his mother was unable or unwilling, be appointed guardian of his three children.

Lists three executors: lawyer John Branca, music industry executive John McClain.and Barry Siege.

Sole beneficiary Michael Jackson Family Trust.

Beneficiaries of the Michael Jackson Family Trust appear limited to his children and mother. Six other relatives, including brother Tito’s three sons, who are named as “contingent remainder beneficiaries,” would have been beneficiaries if his children and mother were not alive at time of MJ’s death.

Filed Under Evidence Room, Celebrity Justice, Wills, Michael Jackson | Leave a Comment (trackback)

Stephanie Seymour vs. Peter Brant: Supermodel vs. Billionaire Divorce Starts Ugly

03 Jun

By Stacy Schneider, Esq.

Victoria’s Secret supermodel Stephanie Seymour should trade in her lingerie for a full set of body armor. She needs it to defend herself from soon-to-be ex-husband, billionaire Peter Brant. Seymour is suing the polo player for divorce in a bucolic Connecticut courthouse which is no stranger to high net worth splits, and he has already come out swinging. Although the former Sports Illustrated cover girl started the court proceedings, Brant started the battle. And the writing is on the court house wall– Brant won’t be fighting fair.
Read more

Filed Under Celebrity Justice, Divorce, Stephanie Seymour | 1 Comment (trackback)

Ophrah’s Legal Maneuver Backfires in an Aha Moment

02 May

By USLaw

Oprah Aha Moment Oprah Winfrey is trying to lay claim to the “aha moment”. After Mutual of Omaha proclaimed itself the “official sponsor of the aha moment” in a major marketing campaign, the talk show queen sent the insurance a company a request to “cease and desist” use of the phrase on the basis she was the first to popularize it.

In response, Mutual filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming it has the right use the phrase in advertisements as a result of its submission of a federal trademark application in February and Oraph’s prior failure to police use of the phrase. The company claims its “research to obtain its federal trademark uncovered no competing federally registered trademarks, and the trademark application received no opposition.” Yet, Chicagoan Richard Roeper’s research revealed hundreds of examples in which the phrase has been used in pop culture.

While the insurance company’s campaign defines the aha moment as “those amazing, uplifting, inspirational moments that changed [people’s] lives,” what’s most interesting is how scientists have discovered what scientists have discovered about such moments.

Filed Under Celebrity Justice, Ophrah Winfrey | Leave a Comment (trackback)

Obama Inconsistent in Describing his Supreme Court Replacement: Judge of Law or of Hopes?

01 May

By USLaw

President Obama shared some of the principles he will follow in selecting someone to replace Justice Souter:

“I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a case book. It is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives — whether they can make a living and care for their families; whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation.

I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles as an essential ingredient for arriving as just decisions and outcomes.”

He continued:

“I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role.

I will seek somebody who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded, and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time.”

The two parts of this statement might strike many as inconsistent. One may feel there are situations in which the rules established by law may not always facilitate the hopes and struggles of all people– that often parties in court are confronting a law or legal principle that benefits one parties hopes to the detriment to the others. What is consistent with what most believe to be Constitutional principles is that the judicial branch interpret the intent of the legislative branch and the founders, not the hopes of the parties before the bench. It sounds as though the President’s description better suits the conception of a good legislator rather than one charged with applying the law.

Filed Under Political Justice, Barack Obama | Leave a Comment (trackback)

Bush DOJ / CIA Torture Memos Outline Dubious Application of US Law to Interrogation of Qaeda Operatives

17 Apr

By USLaw

Written by Bush Administration Deputy and Assistant Attorney Generals John Yoo, Jay Bybee, and Steven Bradbury for the benefit of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) counsel, the four so-called “torture memos”released by Obama’s Department of Justice outline water boarding and a number of other interrogation techniques that permitted to be applied to government detainees suspected of being involved with al Qaeda plots against American interests.

The full text of the memos below the following excerpts.

Walling

“A flexible false wall will be constructed. The individual is placed with his heels touching the wall: The interrogator pulls the individual forward and then quickly and firmly pushes the individual into the wall. It is the individual’s shoulder blades that hit the wall. During this motion, the head and neck are supported with a rolled hood or towel that provides a c-collar effect to help prevent whiplash…

You have orally informed us that the false wall is in part constructed to create a loud sound when the individual hits it, which will further shock or surprise the individual. In part, the idea is to create a sound that will make the impact seem far worse than it is and that will be far worse than any injury that might result from the action.”

Filed Under Bush Follies, Political Justice | Leave a Comment (trackback)

keep looking »