[ Pretrial Discussion Closed ] AEG files summary judgment motion to dismiss Katherine's lawsuit

[passy001]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Pure speculation. You can't have any idea what goes on behind the scenes.

That's a very weak argument.

These are facts whether you like them or not. There is no evidence to even suggest otherwise. The kids are just too young to even guess what is going on. they are pretty much used as pawns by a family who refuses to work for a living and continues to seek ways to leech off their deceased member. KJ is too weak to say "no" to her curbs and is under heavy pressure to file frivolous lawsuits so she can feed her curbs after she's gone from this world.

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

It's not about that.

This nurse states that Michael had an implant in 2003 and did not tell him about it. It's expected that AEG will argue MJ withheld medical information - even from medical personal during surgery. So AEG can use it to show Michael hid his drug abuse from everyone and therefore they did not know it either.

I tried finding the FDA approval and 2003 doesn't really make sense. Injections were pretty common - but implant in 2003??? No article on this stated the actually brand name - there are two substances that are often confused. But the one implant I found (no in depth digging for hours, though) says FDA approval was 2006. Other trials in 2011.

I checked a few addiction forums and there's no buzz in that timeframe about an implant all later.

This reminds me of article claiming that he supposedly had used Propofol at the end of the 80ies- when it wasn't even available yet.

Was this available in any of the court documents - or is this just usual hearsay from tabloids?

 

[StellaJackson]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

That's a very weak argument.

These are facts whether you like them or not. There is no evidence to even suggest otherwise. The kids are just too young to even guess what is going on. they are pretty much used as pawns by a family who refuses to work for a living and continues to seek ways to leech off their deceased member. KJ is too weak to say "no" to her curbs and is under heavy pressure to file frivolous lawsuits so she can feed her curbs after she's gone from this world.

All pure speculation. The plaintiffs are Katherine and the kids. One can only speculate as to what would happen with the money. As far as them working goes, Janet is married to a billionaire and the brothers are currently touring, When Michael was alive they all worked. Marlon worked in media production, Tito and Jermaine were always performing and appearing on tv shows, at least in this country, and so on.

Can you show me the evidence which proves the other siblings are due to receive money from this lawsuit?

 

[passy001]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

All pure speculation. The plaintiffs are Katherine and the kids. One can only speculate as to what would happen with the money. As far as them working goes, Janet is married to a billionaire and the brothers are currently touring, When Michael was alive they all worked. Marlon worked in media production, Tito and Jermaine were always performing and appearing on tv shows, at least in this country, and so on.

Can you show me the evidence which proves the other siblings are due to receive money from this lawsuit?

I take exception to Janet who in her own right is a millionaire.

As for the rest it is well known that MJ supported his siblings and their children - including paying for their education, child supports and rental till his death. In fact the judge in this case even refused to allow such evidence into court proceedings because she felt it was unnecessary, time consuming and did not relate to the case at hand.

yes some of his siblings have occasionally appeared on TV here and there, but for the most part they were too financially dependent on MJ and were always hounding him to perform with the J5.

if KJ wins (and that is a BIG if), expect her children to benefit directly. KJ will distribute the money to them (she's complained many times before that the money she's getting from the estate is not enough to support her family). this is actually the essence of this lawsuit.

 

[ivy]

I tried finding the FDA approval and 2003 doesn't really make sense. Injections were pretty common - but implant in 2003??? No article on this stated the actually brand name - there are two substances that are often confused. But the one implant I found (no in depth digging for hours, though) says FDA approval was 2006. Other trials in 2011.

I checked a few addiction forums and there's no buzz in that timeframe about an implant all later.

This reminds me of article claiming that he supposedly had used Propofol at the end of the 80ies- when it wasn't even available yet.

Was this available in any of the court documents - or is this just usual hearsay from tabloids?

FDA approval is not required so you are checking the wrong source. There are a lot of drugs - such as diet pills- that are being sold with no FDA approval.

The main drug is quite old , it was developed in 1967. (FAD approved in 1971) As for the implants I found this "The first implants for clinical as opposed to experimental use were made around 1997 by George Malmberg of Wedgewood Pharmacy, Sewell, NJ." and this "‘Second generation’ implants use another established implant technique - embedding naltrexone in a matrix of biodegradable polymer microspheres. The first available implant of this type is made by Dr George O’Neill of GO-Medical Industries in Perth, WA. " No specific dates are given but the article states at the end of the 90s. (apparently the main drug is also available in nasal spray format - not FDA approved but being sold with a prescription) There are medical journal articles dating back to 1998 talking effectiveness and side effects of such implants.

So FDA approved or not, these implants - or pellets as they are actually called- were available since 1997.

And as for the court documents : Yes there's a court document that quotes Fournier - nurse anesthesiologist- that states that Michael had a narcan implant at 2003.

edited to add this

he supposedly had used Propofol at the end of the 80ies- when it wasn't even available yet.

"Propofol was originally developed in the UK by Imperial Chemical Industries as ICI 35868. Clinical trials followed in 1977, using a form solubilised in cremophor EL. However, due to anaphylactic reactions to cremophor, this formulation was withdrawn from the market and subsequently reformulated as an emulsion of a soya oil/propofol mixture in water. The emulsified formulation was relaunched in 1986 by ICI (now AstraZeneca) under the brand name Diprivan (abbreviated version of diisopropyl intravenous anesthetic)"

So Propofol was available since 1986. It got FDA approval in 1989.

 

[serendipity]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

The plaintiffs are Katherine and the kids.

Only because the rest are not beneficiaries of MJ's will. The other day T-Mez pretty much confirmed the siblings were behind this lawsuit.

 

[AngieJ]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

I take exception to Janet who in her own right is a millionaire.

As for the rest it is well known that MJ supported his siblings and their children - including paying for their education, child supports and rental till his death. In fact the judge in this case even refused to allow such evidence into court proceedings because she felt it was unnecessary, time consuming and did not relate to the case at hand.

yes some of his siblings have occasionally appeared on TV here and there, but for the most part they were too financially dependent on MJ and were always hounding him to perform with the J5.

if KJ wins (and that is a BIG if), expect her children to benefit directly. KJ will distribute the money to them (she's complained many times before that the money she's getting from the estate is not enough to support her family). this is actually the essence of this lawsuit.

This is painfully obvious. Since MJ's passing we've seen nothing but desperation from this family.

 

[Autumn II]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

^^

This trial doesn't end with who hired Murray

it goes like

- was murray hired?

- (if yes) who hired him ?

- (if AEG) was hiring negligent? -- this includes knowledge about michael's drug abuse

- (if hiring was negligent) does AEG share responsibility in Michael's death? how much?

- (if yes in responsibility) what are the damages - if any?

But, the questions are like a taxonomy chart. If AEG did NOT hire him, STOP (i.e. that's the end of it) Is that right?

 

[ivy]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

All pure speculation. The plaintiffs are Katherine and the kids. One can only speculate as to what would happen with the money. As far as them working goes, Janet is married to a billionaire and the brothers are currently touring, When Michael was alive they all worked. Marlon worked in media production, Tito and Jermaine were always performing and appearing on tv shows, at least in this country, and so on.

Can you show me the evidence which proves the other siblings are due to receive money from this lawsuit?

Katherine and the kids are plaintiffs because they are Michael's beneficiaries. Plus US Law determines the next of kin : spouse, kids, parents and if none of them alive then siblings. So the siblings have no legal basis to demand any damages from anyone. They couldn't be listed as plaintiffs.

Also as the judge pointed out as the kids are minors and Katherine has filed the lawsuit in their name and signs everything in their name, the main plaintiff is Katherine. As far as the law is concerned, the kids involvement is all Katherine's doing.

There are established relationships between lawyers and some of the Jacksons. Katherine's lawyer in this lawsuit has read a victim impact statement written by Randy at Murray criminal trial. Katherine's lawyers are also representing Randy, Jermaine and Janet.

Finally again for some Jacksons I wouldn't make it sound it like when Michael was alive and they worked they made a lot of money. They had bankruptcy and child support payments. Jermaine even filed court documents stating that his monthly income was $1,100.

 

[ivy]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

But, the questions are like a taxonomy chart. If AEG did NOT hire him, STOP (i.e. that's the end of it) Is that right?

that's the proposed verdict form the jury will use but the trial will happen in full regardless.

You know that the jury listens to all arguments and then make a decision at the end after both parties finish their sides. It's not like they would have testimony for 2 days and ask the jury "okay go back to jury room and answer first question and if you say "yes" we will continue, if you say "no" we'll stop".

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

FDA approval is not required so you are checking the wrong source. There are a lot of drugs - such as diet pills- that are being sold with no FDA approval.

The main drug is quite old , it was developed in 1967. (FAD approved in 1971) As for the implants I found this "The first implants for clinical as opposed to experimental use were made around 1997 by George Malmberg of Wedgewood Pharmacy, Sewell, NJ." and this "‘Second generation’ implants use another established implant technique - embedding naltrexone in a matrix of biodegradable polymer microspheres. The first available implant of this type is made by Dr George O’Neill of GO-Medical Industries in Perth, WA. " No specific dates are given but the article states at the end of the 90s. (apparently the main drug is also available in nasal spray format - not FDA approved but being sold with a prescription) There are medical journal articles dating back to 1998 talking effectiveness and side effects of such implants.

So FDA approved or not, these implants - or pellets as they are actually called- were available since 1997.

It actually makes a huge difference. I ran a clinic and we were one of the clinics that were part of a larger study for a very popular ophthalmic product that has been studied for years, was even approved - but 3didn't hit the market in a massive way about 7 years later.
The FDA also makes huge strides to regulate older meds that have been around - hence why I mentioned the availability of injected substances being available longer.
I was merely wondering if the court documents mentioned the specific brand etc - because I noticed media articles citing naloxone instead of naltrexone. Others articles cite naltrexone.

And as for the court documents : Yes there's a court document that quotes Fournier - nurse anesthesiologist- that states that Michael had a narcan implant at 2003.

Do you have a link by any chance? I'm curious for a number of reasons.

"Propofol was originally developed in the UK by Imperial Chemical Industries as ICI 35868. Clinical trials followed in 1977, using a form solubilised in cremophor EL. However, due to anaphylactic reactions to cremophor, this formulation was withdrawn from the market and subsequently reformulated as an emulsion of a soya oil/propofol mixture in water. The emulsified formulation was relaunched in 1986 by ICI (now AstraZeneca) under the brand name Diprivan (abbreviated version of diisopropyl intravenous anesthetic)"

So Propofol was available since 1986. It got FDA approval in 1989.

I'm curious since I noticed that Propofol didn't seem to have hit ORs in a big time in 1989 - which is why I'm wondering how Michael (Michael Jackson or not...) according to the rags would have been able to be 'addicted' to Propofol since the end of the 80ies.
Practitioners fall into two categories - those that enthusiastically embrace new meds (usually who have exactly one MD in a clinic of that type - the one to whom you send the pharma reps to get rid of him...) and those are more reluctant. You have to teach fellow colleagues etc.

I'm sure if relevant Fournier will be grilled to the umpteenth if this whole issue was truly 'witholding information' etc - how exactly did that come to light - did Fournier just strategically touch the implant site to 'make sure' etc - was Fournier administering anesthesia himself - was he preparing the patient for the actual prep-talk with the anesthetist yaddayadda - since it would make a huge difference. I'm rather curious about that cross exam - perhaps that'll shine some significant light on all of this.

Just found this again:

www.tmz.com/2009/07/29/coroner-ed-winter-michael-jackson-lawrence-koplin-subpoena

^^I'm sure someone who got subpoenaed and had his records looked over with a tooth comb might have his own reasons for all this.

Being Michael Jackson is difficult. If you go to the Dentist to have a tooth pulled with local anesthesia and tell every nurse about an implant - you risk the info leaking out.
I just remembered some Lady claiming to have treated Michael - and she went on some wild rants about her deductions - or just think of Klein sitting down with Levin. Just yikes.

Gonna youtube Dr. Shafer again - his testimony was truly outstanding in that regard. Can we do another Q&A with him?? I bet that would be incredibly interesting.

 

[ivy]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

well wide availability could be an issue but it doesn't mean they didn't exist.

As for the document I only have the 3 page motion to exclude, Fournier's deposition is conditionally under seal. The 3 page document does not provide much info. It just states "narcan implant", "Fournier states MJ tried to deceive him during a surgical procedure in 2003"

If you want the exact quotes

"An order preventing ... David Fournier testifying that Michael Jackson tried to deceive him during a surgical procedure in 2003"

"David Fournier is a nurse anesthetist who provided medical care to MJ in the 1990s and early 2000s. On one or two occasions, Mr. Fournier believed that MJ deceived him by not telling him about a "narcan implant" Jackson had inserted into his body before a surgical procedure Fournier was helping out with. Mr. Fournier testified he believed MJ intentionally failed to tell him about the implant. Mr. Fournier jumps to conclusion that MJ failed to tell him about the implant because MJ knew Fournier would not have agreed to administer him anesthesia if he had."

"Mr. Fournier concedes in his deposition that he's speculating when he says that MJ knew he had the narcan implant inside his body and when he says that Michael Jackson purposefully did not tell him about it".

 

[Vici]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Can someone refresh my memory. Did the judge grant AEG to mention the siblings finance??

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

well wide availability could be an issue but it doesn't mean they didn't exist.

As for the document I only have the 3 page motion to exclude, Fournier's deposition is conditionally under seal. The 3 page document does not provide much info. It just states "narcan implant", "Fournier states MJ tried to deceive him during a surgical procedure in 2003"

If you want the exact quotes

"An order preventing ... David Fournier testifying that Michael Jackson tried to deceive him during a surgical procedure in 2003"

"David Fournier is a nurse anesthetist who provided medical care to MJ in the 1990s and early 2000s. On one or two occasions, Mr. Fournier believed that MJ deceived him by not telling him about a "narcan implant" Jackson had inserted into his body before a surgical procedure Fournier was helping out with. Mr. Fournier testified he believed MJ intentionally failed to tell him about the implant. Mr. Fournier jumps to conclusion that MJ failed to tell him about the implant because MJ knew Fournier would not have agreed to administer him anesthesia if he had."

"Mr. Fournier concedes in his deposition that he's speculating when he says that MJ knew he had the narcan implant inside his body and when he says that Michael Jackson purposefully did not tell him about it".

Thanks, Ivy!
Was just curious - those quotes are indeed quite, hm, vague.
Yeah, lots of speculation indeed.

It's not as if anesthesia is a one-trick pony. Weird. That's quite a stretch on that deduction, too.


See, I want to know what went on. Did Fournier found out about the implant before the surgery? After? How would MJ know for sure Fournier would decline anesthesia? You'd assume the anesthesiologist, being the expert, would adjust the protocol. Or would Fournier have called on someone else to administer anesthesia, or apparently Michael was in his head.

If Michael is too specific and says he knows what Lidocaine is he'll get accused of being an addict that knows too much.
If Michael says he knows that pain meds need to be adjusted in implant carriers - he's a seeker. Heck, what kind of procedure are we talking about? Local anesthesia?
And 'on one or two occasions'? That's a huge difference. Then what's the problem if he already knows? Just, ahem, ask your patient if you already know? Last I checked it's the anesthesiologist asking questions in every pre-op talk.
Someone please grill Fournier - and the public and all of us might learn something useful - the way Dr. Shafer educated the public at large.

 

[bluetopez]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

"An order preventing ... David Fournier testifying that Michael Jackson tried to deceive him during a surgical procedure in 2003"

"David Fournier is a nurse anesthetist who provided medical care to MJ in the 1990s and early 2000s. On one or two occasions, Mr. Fournier believed that MJ deceived him by not telling him about a "narcan implant" Jackson had inserted into his body before a surgical procedure Fournier was helping out with. Mr. Fournier testified he believed MJ intentionally failed to tell him about the implant. Mr. Fournier jumps to conclusion that MJ failed to tell him about the implant because MJ knew Fournier would not have agreed to administer him anesthesia if he had."

"Mr. Fournier concedes in his deposition that he's speculating when he says that MJ knew he had the narcan implant inside his body and when he says that Michael Jackson purposefully did not tell him about it".

You don't say?!:ermm: Really would like to know why he thinks that and how he eventually found out MJ had this implant?

Which by the way is the first time I ever heard you can do such a thing? Interesting!

 

[Ashtanga]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

According to 'The Sun' (yes I know) it was found in his body after he passed.

wasnt in the autopsy report?

No, it is not mentioned in the autopsy report. To me, that's bullshit. -_- And The Sun > uke: People are taking advantage the opportunity to create a lot of crazy stories about Michael to play the man's name in the mud. Sad. Another nightmare is about to begin with that damn trial! *big sigh*

 

[marebear]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

If Katherine wins she can do whatever she wants and give it to whoever she wants. What she gets from the estate is more than enough for someone her age. But for the whole Jackson family obviously not enough. They know when she dies everything goes back to Michael's children and they are left with nothing. It might say Katherine and the kids on paper but they might as well have put every person in the Jackson family on it as well. With Randy's name being on top. Someone who tried to steal from his own brother and almost cost him his catalogues and other assets. It's all connected one way or another.

 

[Ashtanga]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

IWhat she gets from the estate is more than enough for someone her age. But for the whole Jackson family obviously not enough. They know when she dies everything goes back to Michael's children and they are left with nothing.

Katherine should be ashamed of herself -_- and should alert their cubs to do your own business, having your own money, go ahead without depending on anyone. And most importantly: they leave Michael alone, stop playing his name in the mud and stop using his name to make money! Michael is not a mine of money! errin: This family disgusts me. uke:

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

... People are taking advantage the opportunity to create a lot of crazy stories about Michael to play the man's name in the mud. Sad. Another nightmare is about to begin with that damn trial! *big sigh*

Well yeah! Every promoter should grill their female singers for birth control implants and if they had intrauterine devices about 9 years previously. All these things could potentially result in death. *sarcarsm*

 

[Petrarose]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Well here is a nice photo so you do not have to think of the autopsy photo. It is Michael's AEG trial flowers and the inscription says "Peace and tranquility at this time"

 

[Aquarius]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Beautiful flowers. Too bad AEG would drag Michael through the mud because of Katherine & family.

I was thinking about AEG's question about if Katherine has any responsibility in Michael's death and I remembered what Joe said he asked Katherine to visit Michael that he didn't look well, or something similar, and she responded something like she wanted to give him privacy. If that was true then, if she's the mother & didn't do anything how does she expects others to do something for her son?

She's creating a lot of damage to her son and to her family and she can stop it, how I wish she comes to her senses & say stop, I won't go any further with this. There's also something else that bothers me, who's paying for her attorney's fees?

Just hope the jury have the sense the Jacksons don't have & award them nothing. It'll be the lowest blow that this family benefit by trashing their dead son & brother.

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Don't blame AEG for what his family started

 

[Petrarose]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Don't blame AEG for what his family started

So true^^. Usually when the lawyers take your case, they tell you the angle they will push. This means that Katherine knows that her lawyers are pushing this druggie angle & the main claims about Michael. Uusally you can tell your attorney not to say some particular thing, but you can tell that Katherine allows the attorney to do whatever they can to make her win, even if they have to show her son as this out of control addict.

Something I have come to realize more than ever is that the family do not care about Michael's legacy. They only care about money, so they are trashing Michael to get money, and they want to make sure that if they lose that case, certain people, like Branca & children, will not have much of a legacy to depend on. To them, if they cannot get the money, then outsiders should not get it either. Hence, there is no need to protect Michael at all in this case.

I think Michael made a big mistake when he left his children under the care of Katherine. If she was not a guardian or beneficiary she would not be able to sue on behalf of anyone. However, I guess you have to leave some money for your elderly mom.

Bubs I agree with you about AEG going to show that an out of control addict would not be able to work for all these other years and make billions as the family claim. That is why AEG has experts who are going to show how long Michael would be expected to live. Most likely they will show the expert some bogus information about how michael was a raving addict and then the expert would look at that & claim, well according to our tables and figures, people with these conditions live for X amount of years. I guess that is why Putnam can say Michael would have died anyway.

 

[Tygger]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Randy Jackson ?@randyjackson8 15 Sep 10
I am doing my best to keep that promise. On this day my family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against AEG. I am proud of my family.

The plaintiffs are Katherine and the kids. I wouldn't rely on what Randy says.

Randy's mother, his niece, and nephews are a part of his family.

There are no facts to prove this trial was done by Katherine's children by force or to receive damages possibly awarded to Katherine. That is an opinion.

I did not hear Tom Mesereau confirm this case was Katherine's children's doing.

The Jackson parents and their nine children all had money issues at one time or another. This includes their son Michael.

 

[Bubs]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Can someone refresh my memory. Did the judge grant AEG to mention the siblings finance??

allowed(motion denied)- Motion 4 - Michael's siblings have or had financial problems

- Gifts from Michael Jackson to his siblings are relevant to the issue of Jackson's damages and for the purposes of cross examination/impeachment of siblings.
- However presentation of the siblings entire finances is irrelevant and presents undue consumption of time.

 

[Bubs]

The Jackson parents and their nine children all had money issues at one time or another. This includes their son Michael.

The difference between MJ and his so called family money issues was that when MJ had money problems, he intended to fix it himself and work towards getting money, but this so called family expects someone else to foot the bill and fix their money issue.

No, it is not mentioned in the autopsy report. To me, that's bullshit. -_- And The Sun > uke: People are taking advantage the opportunity to create a lot of crazy stories about Michael to play the man's name in the mud. Sad. Another nightmare is about to begin with that damn trial! *big sigh*

SUN is making up stories. Court docs didn't say that implant was still there 2009, and they say "according to court docs" which gives more credibility their story even if its not true. I really hate when other tabloids copy-paste the same story without checking the facts, like radar did:
"Jackson had Narcan — a drug that blocks the brain’s pleasure receptors — implanted into his person in 2003, and it was still there at the time of his 2009 death, the UK Sun reported, quoting court docs."

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

has fournier got issues with mj or what. so he didnt even know if mj even had one at that time yet jumps to huge conclusions that are now being turned into fact

i find it sad that no matter what facts are shown certain ppl repeatedly feel the need to come to a michael jackson board and try to defend those that are helping to deztroy what is left of mjs legacy in an effort to gain money because of laziness and greed
-------------------

"Mr. Fournier concedes in his deposition that he's speculating when he says that MJ knew he had the narcan implant inside his body and when he says thatMichael Jackson*purposefully did not tell him about it"

---------------------

 

[Bubs]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 10h
Jacksons atty says all docs should be unsealed, except personal email addresses/phone numbers. "They want everyone not to see the evidence".

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 10h
AEG attorneys argue they only want a handful of docs sealed such as some financial reports, personal contact info, 3rd party social security

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 10h
AEG says the attorneys for Michael Jackson's Estate are the ones asking 4 sealing of substantial amount of docs. Issue 2 be discussed Monday

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 9h
April 24-25 are tentatively scheduled to be motions days. Judge will rule on the motions filed by both sides prior to beginning of trial

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 9h
Panish accused AEG attys from trying to keep evidence under seal so it cannot be discussed in trial. He said it's detrimental to his clients

ABC7 Court News ?@ABC7Courts 9h
AEG says the sealing they're looking for are very narrow and relates to few docs only. They said the Estate is the one asking for broad seal
-----------------------------------------

Thank you estate for looking after MJ and his benefit during the trial.

 

[Bubs]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

Katherine and the kids are plaintiffs because they are Michael's beneficiaries. Plus US Law determines the next of kin : spouse, kids, parents and if none of them alive then siblings. So the siblings have no legal basis to demand any damages from anyone. They couldn't be listed as plaintiffs.

Also as the judge pointed out as the kids are minors and Katherine has filed the lawsuit in their name and signs everything in their name, the main plaintiff is Katherine. As far as the law is concerned, the kids involvement is all Katherine's doing.

There are established relationships between lawyers and some of the Jacksons. Katherine's lawyer in this lawsuit has read a victim impact statement written by Randy at Murray criminal trial. Katherine's lawyers are also representing Randy, Jermaine and Janet.

Finally again for some Jacksons I wouldn't make it sound it like when Michael was alive and they worked they made a lot of money. They had bankruptcy and child support payments. Jermaine even filed court documents stating that his monthly income was $1,100.

Well said.

+ Jermaine and Randy didn't have money to pay their child support so they went to ask executors if they pay it.
It just shows characteristics of these siblings. "Work for the money" is totally unknown to their vocabulary.

 

[Aquarius]

Re: [General Discussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine's lawsu

The Jackson parents and their nine children all had money issues at one time or another. This includes their son Michael.

You're right but the difference is that Michael depended on himself & Michael parents, their children & grandchildren depended on Michael. And when parents have nine children and only one is helping the parents the other children are getting inderect help by not giving any kind of financial support to their parents. And Michael was the one who helped his family.