Showing posts with label legal fees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legal fees. Show all posts

Monday, May 5, 2025

Nipsey Hussle’s Daughter Caught in Heated Court Dispute Over Inheritance, Guardianship, and Legal Fees

By Samuel Lopez 


Case Summary

  • Legacy in Limbo
    The late rapper’s multimillion-dollar estate—valued at $11 million and growing—is at the center of a contentious legal dispute involving his daughter Emani’s inheritance.
  • Family Ties or Legal Lines?
    Nipsey’s brother Sam plays a vital role in Emani’s life—one the court appears to respect—but legal wrangling over guardianship and attorney compensation continues to cloud the estate proceedings.
  • A Mother’s Claim, a Guardian’s Objection
    Court-appointed counsel for Emani insists her inheritance should not be tapped to cover fees for her mother’s legal team, calling the move inequitable and adversarial.

By Samuel Lopez – USA Herald

[CALIFORNIA] – The fight over Nipsey Hussle’s 16-year-old daughter, Emani Asghedom, has now reached a new level of intensity, with court filings revealing bitter disputes over legal fees and the use of her inheritance to fund opposing counsel.

At the heart of the legal battle is a critical question with vast implications for probate law, family custody arrangements, and minor’s estate protections: Should a child’s inheritance be used to pay legal fees for someone previously opposed to her in court?

Since Nipsey Hussle’s tragic murder in 2019, his family—particularly his brother Samiel “Blacc Sam” Asghedom—has played an active role in safeguarding the legacy he left behind, including the welfare of his daughter Emani. The court, recognizing Sam’s pivotal role in Emani’s life, entrusted guardianship of the minor to Nipsey’s family, with Sam, their sister Samantha, and their mother Angelique Smith stepping forward to ensure Emani’s upbringing and protection.

Multiple sources, including previous court records, have affirmed the close and loving relationship Sam shared with Nipsey. “Sam is the man Nipsey would’ve wanted in his daughter’s life,” a legal analyst familiar with the probate case told USA Herald. “The court seems to honor that.”

Full Article & Source:
Nipsey Hussle’s Daughter Caught in Heated Court Dispute Over Inheritance, Guardianship, and Legal Fees

Wednesday, December 22, 2021

Jamie Spears files to have Britney continue to pay his legal fees

By Alex Heigl and Eileen Reslen


Jamie Spears isn’t done telling Britney, “Gimme More.”

The pop star’s estranged father filed documents in court last week to have his daughter’s estate continue to pay for his legal fees, despite having been suspended from her conservatorship in September, Variety reports.

Jamie Spears sought the court’s “confirmation, authorization and direction” to compel the estate to fork over for attorneys “participating in proceedings concerning Jamie’s ongoing fiduciary duties relating to winding up” the conservatorship.

Meanwhile, “Mr. Spears reaped many millions of dollars from Britney as a conservator, while paying his lawyers millions more, all from Britney’s work and hard-earned money,” the 40-year-old Britney’s attorney Matthew Rosengart told Page Six in a statement Monday. 

“The conservatorship has been terminated and Mr. Spears was suspended ignominiously.” 

Rosengart concluded forcefully, “Under the circumstances, his petition is not only legally meritless, it is an abomination. Britney poignantly testified about the pain her father caused her and this only adds to it. This is not what a father who loves his daughter does.”

Spears was forced to foot her father’s legal bills for the duration of the 13-year conservatorship controlling virtually every aspect of her life, meaning she was put in the position of paying for both sides of her battle to free herself. Variety says that Spears’ attorney charges $1,200 per hour; it was not specified if one of Jamie’s attorneys named in the piece, Alex Weingarten, charged that figure.

“Prompt payment on account of Jamie’s attorneys’ fees is necessary to ensure the Conservatorship can be wound up quickly and efficiently to allow Britney to take control of her life as she and Jamie desire,” the 27-page petition, obtained by Variety, reads in part.

“It would be contrary to public policy if Jamie’s years of dedication to protect his daughter … could subject him to personal bankruptcy and ruin defending baseless claims,” the filing reads. “No person would ever want to step into the role as conservator if a conservatee could force a conservator to personally pay substantial legal fees defending unfounded allegations.”


The New York Times reported Sunday that Jamie picked up a $40,000 loan from his daughter’s business manager Lou Taylor‘s firm, Tri Star Sports & Entertainment Group, days before Spears was placed under the conservatorship in 2008. It’s unknown how Jamie, who had previously filed for bankruptcy, used the cash.

Full Article & Source:

Friday, April 2, 2021

Britney Spears' dad requests pop star to pay nearly $2 million of his legal fees

An attorney for the pop star recently requested a court to remove Jamie Spears as conservator of her person

By Melissa Roberto

Britney Spears' father has requested the pop star's estate cover the steep costs of his legal fees.

In a declaration recently filed by Jamie Spears' attorneys, the 39-year-old "Toxic" singer's father is requesting her estate cover the costs of nearly $2 million, according to Entertainment Tonight.

Additionally, Jamie is also requesting to be compensated for the time he spent as his daughter's conservator from the period of Nov. 1, 2019 to Feb. 28, 2021, Fox News confirmed. The court doc notes that payments for his time as conservator up to Oct. 31, 2019 have already been approved.

"I am authorized and allowed to receive compensation through my personal services corporation Spears Management, Inc., for services performed as Conservator of the Estate of Britney Jean Spears, in the amount of $16,000 monthly plus $2,000 monthly for the cost of an office space in a secure location that is dedicated to Ms. Spears' activities," Jamie states in the filing.

The court document comes on the heels of Britney's attorney officially requesting that Jodi Montgomery be made her permanent conservator. Britney, via her attorney, also asked that Jamie resign from his position altogether and cited a job well done on behalf of Montgomery. Montgomery was Spears’ acting conservator while Jamie temporarily stepped away from the position in 2019 due to "health reasons."

Currently, both Jamie and Bessemer Trust oversee Spears' estate, which includes all of her financial decisions, and Jamie will have a chance to object to any petition to completely remove him from his post as co-conservator.

Last month, David Glass, a certified family law attorney and Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology who is not involved in the proceedings, called the potential move a "big step up" for Montgomery, if she landed the gig.

Britney Spears broke her silence on the 'Framing Britney Spears' documentary this week, saying it caused her to cry for two weeks despite not tuning in. (Kevin Mazur/Getty Images)

"[Montgomery] is the person who is just making personal decisions for medical treatment and whether she needs bodyguards. Does she need to see a therapist? All sorts of everything except money issues for a concerned person," Glass explained.

Britney's conservatorship has sparked a public debate in recent years as supporters of the "Free Britney" movement habitually speak out in support of the star in addition to camping outside of court on the days her conservatorship hearings are held.

The February release of the New York Times' documentary "Framing Britney Spears" reignited the public's interest in her case. This week, Britney broke her silence on the documentary, admitting that while she has not watched it, clips she did see caused her to cry "for two weeks."

Full Article & Source:
 
See Also:

Tuesday, March 9, 2021

Disney Grandson Bradford Lund Demands "Hostile" Trustees Not Pay Legal Fees to Their Law Firm From His Trust Funds

Court of Appeal upholds Lund's petition in one sentence - rejecting Trustees and their counsel's opposition to the right to replace a judge as a matter of law

Lund sees "negligence" and "indifference" to the law in filing by Trustees' law firm, Mitchell Silberberg and Knupp

 
News provided by
Lanny Davis

LOS ANGELES, March 5, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Walt Disney's grandson, Bradford D. Lund, today sent a letter to his four trustees – L. Andrew Gifford, Robert L. Wilson, Douglas M. Strode, and the First Republic Trust Company (collectively "the Trustees") – demanding that they refrain from using any trust funds for which he is the beneficiary to pay any legal fees to the Trustees' law firm Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp ("MSK").  

Lund won a decisive victory on February 23, 2021 when the California Court of Appeal unanimously rejected the Trustees' and MSK's attempt to block Lund's request for a new judge and issued an alternative writ ordering the lower court judge to vacate his prior order denying the peremptory challenge and issue an order granting the same. Alternatively, the appellate panel issued an Order to Show cause why it should not issue a Writ of Mandate. The appellate panel's decision in favor of Lund was made in a single sentence, rejecting the 33-page filing by MSK at the behest of the "hostile" Trustees, as Lund referred to them in his letter. In its decision, the Court of Appeal cited the clear California precedent virtually ignored by the Trustees' attorneys, MSK, but cited by Lund's lawyers: 

"Opposing counsel on behalf of the [Trustees] were finally forced to admit the indisputable precedent of Truck Insurance Exchange and Grant (of which they were aware when Mr. Lund initially requested Judge Suzuki to correct his original denial) that: A previously denied § 170.6 challenge does not remove that party's one opportunity to duly and timely file another." – Lund's Reply to Trustees' Opposition to Writ.

Lund wrote in his letter to the Trustees: "MSK should not be paid legal fees out of my or my sister's trust," citing the summary dismissal of MSK's opposition to his motion. 

He continued: "You are also on notice that I continue to believe that each of you individually and collectively have again taken actions hostile to my interests in what I feel is clear violation of your fiduciary duties owed to me.  I am still seriously considering taking additional legal action for this and past violations of your duties." 

Lund wrote that the Trustees and MSK "should be embarrassed" by the Court of Appeal's summary dismissal and repeated his demand that the Trustees "not use any trust funds associated with the trust of which I am the beneficiary to pay MSK."

Contact: Alex Lange
alange@tridentdmg.com 
(202) 480-4309

SOURCE Lanny Davis

Full Article & Source:
 
See Also:

Saturday, March 6, 2021

Lawyers recovering funds for theft victims request $315K for fees

Click to View Video
Lawyers recovering funds for theft victims request $315K for fees  
 
By Arthur Kane

Lawyers working to recover money for the victims of disgraced attorney Robert Graham want more than half of the funds the trustee has on hand for legal fees, records show.

On Feb. 9, Las Vegas attorney Jacob Houmand and his associates filed a request to the court for nearly $316,000 in fees and expenses for work on the case since 2016. U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Bruce T. Beesley is scheduled to review the filings March 9, records show.

The trustee is holding $528,000, the filing says, adding the trustee will have collected $807,106.78 over the whole case.

But UNLV law professor Nancy B. Rapoport, who has reviewed fees for several bankruptcy courts in other cases, said victims can ask the court to reject any fees they believe are unreasonable. After reviewing the detailed billings at the Review-Journal’s request, Rapoport was concerned that some of the items that the lawyers billed for may not be necessary.

Rapoport said the court could question billings for legal research that experienced bankruptcy attorneys should already know and hours billed for attorney work that could likely be handled by the trustee, or lesser-paid staff.

“There are issues raised here that a court might want to review, whether or not a party in interest is objecting,” she wrote in an email exchange.

In 2017, Graham pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 16 to 40 years in prison for stealing more than $16 million from his clients’ accounts to pay business and personal expenses. The judge ordered him to pay back the money in restitution, but a Review-Journal investigation found none of that has been paid.

Graham’s victims filed an involuntary bankruptcy case in 2016 against his firm to recover any remaining assets, but after more than four years, only accountants and lawyers have been paid.

Thane Parton, who lost nearly $500,000 to Graham’s thefts, said he is concerned about paying an attorney to contest the fees when the court will likely still award the money to lawyers and contractors.

“Every time you talk to an attorney, you’re afraid that there will be a bill,” Parton said.

Houmand did not respond to repeated requests for comment, and trustee Shelley Krohn emailed that she will not do an interview on the expenses in the case.

“Everything that … I have done … has been documented in the Bankruptcy Court docket and is fully accessible to you and the public,” Krohn wrote. “Every settlement agreement, every dollar collected, every professional employed and paid, etc. — it’s all there in black and while (sic). Thus, there is nothing for me to comment on. With regard to any matters that are still pending, I know you understand that I cannot and will not comment on these issues while they remain unresolved.”

Assets and bills

It’s not clear if the approximately $800,000 that the trustee collected includes about $400,000 of past due accounts receivable. Rapoport said outstanding debts that old are nearly impossible to collect.

In asking for fees and expenses, Houmand wrote that the fees to pay him and other attorneys are billed at $250 and $375 an hour, and were for case administration, asset analysis and recovery, meetings, communication and other items in collecting assets for victims.

Houmand’s detailed billing statements repeatedly show thousands of dollars going for research an experienced bankruptcy attorney should know or work others could do more cheaply.

For example, on Dec. 22, 2016, Houmand billed about $1,200 for “research and analysis regarding the ability of a Chapter 7 Trustee to avoid transfers made from an IOLTA Trust account.” Five days later, he billed $942 for “research and analysis regarding a Chapter 7 Trustee’s standing to avoid transfers of property held in trust.”

More than $600 was billed on Dec. 29, 2016, for researching and obtaining documents from the Washington County Recorder’s office about a property Graham owned in Utah. On Jan. 4, 2017, attorneys billed $225 for less than an hour to visit a potential auction site to get rid of any Graham property they identified. Six days later they charged $585 for less than two hours to upload materials to a website to provide information to creditors about the status of the case, records show.

Bankruptcy law requires that contractors and secured debtors get paid before the victims, Rapoport said.

While some of the expenses need justification, Rapoport said finding assets is expensive and the court has to pay professionals to get experienced help.

“If the fees consume most of the estate, that’s a sad outcome, but the Code was designed to find ways to encourage professionals to work on cases, which is why administrative expenses are a high priority,” she wrote.

More money for contractors

The Review-Journal reported in January that accountants and attorneys have already been paid $113,000, including $108,000 to a forensic accounting firm to determine what Graham assets could be seized. A firm spokesman declined to comment about how much money the firm recovered.

In recent filings, Century City, Calif., attorneys Diamond McCarthy LLP are asking for $4,500 for dealing with Graham’s malpractice insurance, and reviewing the criminal case and Graham’s wife’s bankruptcy records, records show.

But another attorney already billed for work on the malpractice insurance, records and interviews show.

Las Vegas attorney Ryan Andersen was hired on a contingency basis to see if he could persuade Graham’s malpractice insurance company to pay victims. He obtained an agreement for the company to return about $11,000 in premiums to settle the case. Andersen received 40 percent of that — or about $5,000 — for 60 hours of work. He said it was considerably less than he would have received if he was allowed to bill his hourly rate.

“In a case like this — and in other financial fraud cases — it is very expensive and time consuming to unwind and it does require specialized knowledge,” he said in a January interview. “Distribution takes a long time in a case like this.”

He said Diamond McCarthy stopped working on the insurance issue months before he came on board. “Diamond McCarthy firm was doing general overview work in an effort to determine avenues of recovery to pursue,” he wrote in an email exchange this week.

Additionally, on Feb. 9, accounting firm Paul M. Healey and Sons asked for $3,337.50 for about 10 hours of work reviewing Graham’s tax returns and tax preparation, records show.

Missed asset opportunities

Parton said his attorney informed the trustee about client money Graham spent on donations to Colorado State University, Boy’s Town and accounts Graham held at City National Bank. But Parton said he hasn’t seen any efforts to investigate and recover those funds.

“Every time we bring it up, nobody wants to talk about it,” he said of the City National account.

Parton said his fears that attorneys and contractors will draw most of the money appear to be coming true.

“There won’t be anything left,” said Parton in response to the latest filings. “It is a concern that (lawyers and accountants) are fighting over all the rest of the money and none will go to victims.”

Healey and representatives of Diamond McCarthy did not return calls and email seeking comment.

A previous version of the story incorrectly described Nancy B. Rapoport’s qualifications. She has worked for bankruptcy courts examining fee requests for other cases. 

Full Article & Source:

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Judge nixes $1M request for lawyer fees in case worth $125K

SCRANTON, Pa. (AP) — A federal judge has angrily rejected a request for more than $900,000 in legal fees in a Pennsylvania insurance case that saw the attorneys' client receive $125,000.

The (Scranton) Times-Tribune (http://bit.ly/2vxFyza ) reports U.S. District Judge Malachy Mannion found the fee request so "mind-boggling" and "outrageously excessive" that he's planning to report the attorneys to a Pennsylvania disciplinary board that investigates complaints of attorney misconduct.
Lead attorney Michael Pisanchyn defended the request saying he and another attorney worked hard on the 2013 lawsuit to hold an insurance company responsible for delaying payment of a $25,000 car crash claim and won the client another $100,000 at trial.
Mannion says the bill is based on 2,583 hours, or the equivalent of 323 eight-hour days spent on the case.

Full Article & Source:
Judge nixes $1M request for lawyer fees in case worth $125K

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Records show judge paid private legal fees with taxpayer money

Judge Brenda Weaver
BLUE RIDGE, Ga. — A North Georgia judge covered most of the costs for his court reporter's lawsuit with a local newspaper.

An open records request revealed Appalachian Judicial Circuit Superior Court Judge Roger Bradley paid about $15,700 from his publicly funded bank account in December to Rhonda Stubblefield, his court reporter. The money went toward some of Stubblefield's legal expenses for defending a lawsuit against the Fannin Focus.

The newspaper's publisher, Mark Thomason, said Monday a copy of that check was what he had been looking for in June when he requested a subpoena be issued for two judges' bank accounts, as well as an open records request. Instead, he was indicted on charges of identity fraud, attempt to commit identity fraud and making a false statement.

"That's the only thing we've been after this whole time," he said. "That one stinkin' check."

But Rita Davis-Kirby, the financial director for Fannin County, said the information should not be a surprise to Thomason. While the Times Free Press received an invoice through its records request for the money charged to Stubblefield, Davis-Kirby said she gave Thomason the same invoice.

"I do remember sending all of that information to Mark Thomason," she said Monday. "He had that information back in December."

Thomason said the invoice was not enough information for him. He wanted the check, too, because it would prove exactly how much money flowed from Bradley's account to Stubblefield.

"It didn't say who paid it," Thomason said of the invoice to Stubblefield. "It didn't say anything. The county never confirmed it was paid."

Charges against Thomason and his attorney have since been dropped after their arrest June 24 sparked national media attention.

In April 2015, Bradley used a racial slur for African-Americans while on the bench. Thomason said others in the courtroom told him sheriff's deputies also used the slur. However, Stubblefield's transcript of the hearing did not mention any deputies.

Thomason sued Stubblefield, asking for an audio recording of the hearing. A judge ruled against Thomason in September, saying she listened to the recording and could not hear any inaccuracies in the transcript.

Stubblefield counter sued, demanding $1.6 million from the newspaper. She dropped that case in April, saying the newspaper didn't have enough money to pay even if she won.

In May, her lawyer filed a motion for attorneys' fees. Thomason said the lawyer argued in court that taxpayer money had been spent to defend Stubblefield, even though Stubblefield is a private contractor, not a county employee.

On June 1, Thomason issued a subpoena, asking for the bank records of Bradley and Superior Court Judge Brenda Weaver. He believed he would find a record of the payment to Stubblefield.

Thomason also issued an open records request to a Pickens County commissioner, asking for any checks issued to Weaver's bank account. He wrote in the request he had reason to believe the checks were cashed illegally.

On June 24, the grand jury indicted Thomason on identity fraud charges, with Weaver arguing that Thomason was illegally trying to get into her bank account. A key part of this charge was about whether Thomason's lawyer gave Weaver proper warning about the subpoena — the two sides provide different accounts.

The grand jury also indicted Thomason on a charge of making false statements for writing in his records request that he believed checks for Weaver's account were cashed illegally.

Thomason said he was hoping to confirm through documentation that the county spent taxpayer money on Stubblefield's legal fees. But according to a letter obtained Monday in a records request, this information was readily available.

"Because Ms. Stubblefield's actions leading up to the lawsuit were consistent with standing orders of this court and Georgia law as to access to transcripts she should not be personally responsible for the legal fees and expenses accrued in the defense of her case," Weaver wrote in a Nov. 24 letter to the commission chairs of Fannin, Gilmer and Pickens counties, which make up the Appalachian Judicial Circuit. "Judge Bradley has agreed for his office account to be responsible for her legal expenses."
Weaver told the commissioners the money would cover the costs of Stubblefield's defense against Thomason's lawsuit, but not her counter claim.

The Clark & Clark law firm presented Stubblefield with a bill for their services. According to the firm, about $16,600 worth of work went into defending Thomason's suit. About $1,000 went into the counter suit against Thomason.

On Dec. 7, Bradley signed a $15,691 check for Stubblefield's legal fees. Bradley retired in January. Stubblefield declined to comment.

The investigative file related to the criminal case against Thomason also included copies of all checks written out of Weaver's operating account, beginning in December 2014. This included about $4,200 Weaver wrote to reimburse herself, as well as about $4,400 to two restaurants for lunches for several people in the community in October, when Georgia Supreme Court justices came to the Appalachian Judicial Circuit to hear an oral argument.

"A person of interest"

Before District Attorney Alison Sosebee agreed not to prosecute Thomason or his attorney, an investigator in her office called a prosecutor in Union County, Ga., because Thomason had been listed as a person of interest in a shoplifting case there.

On July 11, Assistant District Attorney Chase Queen responded with a letter. He said Thomason had gone to a Wal-Mart where a shoplifting had occurred and asked for the security officer's case reports dealing with the arrest.

Queen wrote that Thomason identified himself as an investigator with Fannin County Probate Court, not as a reporter. The probate court judge, Scott Kiker, is Thomason's cousin.

"I am all too aware of the questionable character and bad reputation of Mr. Thomason," Queen wrote, adding that Thomason should have been charged with impersonating a public officer.

Thomason said Monday that, in fact, he had requested the reports as a favor for Kiker, who was acting as the defendant's lawyer and not the probate court judge.

Kiker said this was from a case about a year ago, though he provided a different account.

He didn't hire Thomason to investigate the case. He said Thomason went to the Wal-Mart to get information on the defendant as a reporter because the defendant is active at local political functions.

Queen's boss, Enotah Judicial Circuit District Attorney Jeff Langley, did not return a call seeking comment.

Full Article & Source:
Records show judge paid private legal fees with taxpayer money