0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*Mo*

  • Guest

According to ET Online and TMZ the Guardian ad Litem for Prince, Paris and Blanket is Margaret Lodise:


Quote
Guardian ad Litem Appointed for Michael Jackson's Children



A Los Angeles judge has appointed a Guardian ad Litem to represent the interests of Michael Jackson's three young children.

Judge Mitchell Beckloff has named attorney Margaret Lodise of the firm of Sacks, Glazier, Franklin & Lodise, LLP, as the Guardian ad Litem for "Prince" Michael, Paris, and Prince "Blanket." According to the court, the children's grandmother, Katherine Jackson, will remain the Guardian of the Person for the children.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote
Michael Jackson Merchandise Hearing

8/17/2009 3:00 PM PDT by TMZ Staff  



The lawyer for Michael Jackson's kids is set to appear in court for the first time today, as lawyers for the estate and Katherine Jackson's lawyers try to reach an agreement on merchandising all things Michael.

UPDATE 7:10 PM -- And we're done for the day. Biggest headline -- the judge has approved a major Jackson merchandising deal, but there is still one more deal (with AEG for a Jackson memorabilia tour) to be decided upon.

UPDATE 7:03 PM -- The judge has set an evidentiary hearing for Friday -- so the AEG deal won't be approved (or denied) until then.

UPDATE 6:45 PM -- An attorney for AEG says the company wants the deal taken care of this week.

UPDATE 6:41 PM -- And we're back on the record.

UPDATE 6:34 PM -- The judge has ordered a short recess in the hopes all sides can reach an agreement on the AEG deal today. UPDATE 6:32 PM -- The lawyer representing Jackson's kids isn't sure the AEG deal is the best deal out there.

UPDATE 6:24 PM -- One of the lawyers for the special administrators is worried that if the AEG deal isn't approved soon, AEG will pull it off the table.

UPDATE 6:15 PM -- All parties involved continue to express the time constraint they are under -- everyone wants the deals done ASAP.

UPDATE 6:10 PM -- The attorney for the kids just said she is not objecting the AEG deal.

UPDATE 6:05 PM -- An attorney for Katherine just suggested the lawyers for estate have pulled the guardian ad litem towards their side.

UPDATE 5:58 PM -- The deal with Bravado, to produce various different kinds of Jackson memorabilia, has been approved. This deal will generate millions of dollars for the Jackson estate.

UPDATE 5:50 PM -- Howard Weitzman, the attorney for the special administrators, has stated that one of the beneficiaries approves the AEG deal (to put on a Jackson memorabilia tour), but one is against it. We've been hearing Katherine is not happy about the arrangement, so she is probably the one who has objected.

UPDATE 5:35 PM -- The judge has set a tentative date (September 9) to hear Katherine's safe harbor petition. What that means is that Katherine wants to file an objection to the special administrators, but doesn't want to do so if it would be considered protesting the will. Jackson's will contains a no-contest clause -- meaning anyone who challenges it loses their inheritance rights.

UPDATE 5:30 PM -- The judge said that if it weren't for Katherine Jackson's procedural posturing, both parties would not have to spend as much time in court.

UPDATE 5:13 PM -- The judge said he agrees with Lodise -- there needs to be a simpler process put in place so the special administrators of Jackson's estate don't have to go before the judge to do every single thing.

UPDATE 5:11 PM -- The judge wants to come up with a trial date for Katherine Jackson's objection to the permanent appointment of the special administrators.

UPDATE 5:10 PM -- Margaret Lodise, the guardian ad litem for Jackson's kids, has submitted a report to the court.

UPDATE 4:57 PM -- The lawyers are getting into place.

UPDATE 4:47 PM -- Claire Elisabeth Fields Cruise, the woman who claims to be the bio mom of MJ's kids, is in the courtroom. Let the fun begin!


Launch photos: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Looking at the papers that allegedly were filed in court yesterday on behalf of Katherine Jackson and Conrad Murray we see something different:






In the Complaint for Damages as well as in the Motion to Dismiss Katherine Jackson is named as the Guardian ad Litem for Prince, Paris and Blanket.

The same thing goes for Joe Jackson's Wrongful Death Suit:




Legal questions:
So, who is the real Guardian ad Litem, and in case Katherine is not, it this reason enough to throw these cases out?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

MJonmind

Michael find this whole legal thing so boring, he's falling asleep. :lol:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

curls

Quote from: "MJonmind"
Michael find this whole legal thing so boring, he's falling asleep. :lol:

Or maybe he's just checking if we're falling asleep!!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

paula-c

Another mistake :?:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

*Mo*

  • Guest
Quote from: "paula-c"
Another mistake :?:

If that's a mistake then it's a consistent one, because Katherine is listed as the kids' Guardian at Litem in all three legal papers...
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

I am not a lawyer, in particular not in California ;) , but as far as I understand Guardian ad Litem might be appointed for a particular selected matter, in case the General Guardian does not feel sufficiently capable to represent the minor in that field. So maybe Katherine is a general guardian and Margaret Lodise has been selected for estate and financial matters only?  :?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*Mo*

  • Guest
Jackson Court Hearing -- Afternoon Session
8/10/2009 3:10 PM PDT by TMZ Staff  



Here's the blow-by-blow inside the Michael Jackson estate hearing. KEEP REFRESHING for the latest.

UPDATE: Court is adjourned for the day. They'll be back again on August 24.

UPDATE: The judge has sealed courtroom temporarily.

UPDATE: The lawyers just said Bravado has a number of buyers interested in merchandising Jackson memorabilia but if they don't get the green light quickly the buyers could lose interest within a week.

UPDATE: This is really important. The judge just appointed a guardian ad litem for the 3 Jackson kids. That means they will have independent representation in court proceedings. The notion -- that the interests of the kids may not completely square with the interests of Katherine Jackson or the estate. It's not unusual this happened, but it's significant.

UPDATE: An attorney from AEG has assured the judge none of the video material in question has to do with the children. UPDATE: Billie Jean just raised her hand like she wants to talk. This isn't Ms. Marcus' fifth period English class.

UPDATE: AEG is proposing a Michael Jackson memorabilia tour that would visit three cities.

UPDATE: The judge has taken the bench -- and Billie Jean is back with more documents.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Puff

  • Guest
Quote from: "ForstAMoon"
I am not a lawyer, in particular not in California ;) , but as far as I understand Guardian ad Litem might be appointed for a particular selected matter, in case the General Guardian does not feel sufficiently capable to represent the minor in that field. So maybe Katherine is a general guardian and Margaret Lodise has been selected for estate and financial matters only?  :?


Quote
Guardians ad litem are often appointed in divorce cases or in parenting time disputes to represent the interests of the minor children. Guardians ad litem are also used in other family matters involving grandparents obtaining custody or grandparenting time as well as protection orders where one parent is attempting to get an order against another party with a legal connection to the mother of the child. The kinds of people appointed as a guardian ad litem vary by state, ranging from volunteers to social workers to regular attorneys to others with the appropriate qualifications. The guardian ad litem's only job is to represent the minor children's best interests.
A guardian ad litem is a unique type of guardian in a relationship that has been created by a court order only for the duration of a legal action.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

MissG

When MJ was facing the trials in 2005, for the nature of it, i believe that the custody of his children were also questioned.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

*

paula-c

Well if these legal documents say Katherine is the guardian ad litem, is what really should be.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

And who is Margaret Lodise? :?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Puff

  • Guest
Quote from: "Red_Rose"
And who is Margaret Lodise? :?


She is a lawyer and Judge Mitchell Beckloff has named her as the Guardian ad Litem for Prince, Paris and Blanket...
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

I think Guardian as Litem can work a couple of different ways. It can be for individual cases but that would be absolutely dumb in the case of the Jackson kids. For instance, my son had one for his court proceedings which involved his accident (this is where, I came to get a lot of my knowledge of the law, the thing lasted years and I went to work for a bunch of these lawyers). For my son, he needed someone to protect his interests regarding how much money he should receive etc, making sure that it all seemed appropriate.
   
  For the Jackson kids, there really should be a Guardian ad Litem appointed to cover all of their interests, not just one for certain cases and that absolutely should NOT be a family member. It is not because Katherine is not trustworthy, it is because she is human and has emotion attached to the children. There can be mistakes made when family handles this stuff.

 Mo, without even reading these documents I know the answer to your question, because coincidentally this just came up with my son. Not only can they throw these cases out but if a court proceeding commences and it is found out some years later that a child is improperly represented in court the case can be reopened.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.

Mark Twain

*Mo*

  • Guest
Quote from: "reading_on"
I think Guardian as Litem can work a couple of different ways. It can be for individual cases but that would be absolutely dumb in the case of the Jackson kids. For instance, my son had one for his court proceedings which involved his accident (this is where, I came to get a lot of my knowledge of the law, the thing lasted years and I went to work for a bunch of these lawyers). For my son, he needed someone to protect his interests regarding how much money he should receive etc, making sure that it all seemed appropriate.
   
  For the Jackson kids, there really should be a Guardian ad Litem appointed to cover all of their interests, not just one for certain cases and that absolutely should NOT be a family member. It is not because Katherine is not trustworthy, it is because she is human and has emotion attached to the children. There can be mistakes made when family handles this stuff.

 Mo, without even reading these documents I know the answer to your question, because coincidentally this just came up with my son. Not only can they throw these cases out but if a court proceeding commences and it is found out some years later that a child is improperly represented in court the case can be reopened.

Thank you!

Now, I tend to believe that:

  • They're including "errors" in these legal documents to see if if the public is just swallowing it or someone picks up on the errors;
  • They're building in 'safety measures' in case things turn out the wrong way in order to be able to have decisions revoked.

Thoughts please?[/b]
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Quote from: "*Mo*"
Quote from: "reading_on"
I think Guardian as Litem can work a couple of different ways. It can be for individual cases but that would be absolutely dumb in the case of the Jackson kids. For instance, my son had one for his court proceedings which involved his accident (this is where, I came to get a lot of my knowledge of the law, the thing lasted years and I went to work for a bunch of these lawyers). For my son, he needed someone to protect his interests regarding how much money he should receive etc, making sure that it all seemed appropriate.
   
  For the Jackson kids, there really should be a Guardian ad Litem appointed to cover all of their interests, not just one for certain cases and that absolutely should NOT be a family member. It is not because Katherine is not trustworthy, it is because she is human and has emotion attached to the children. There can be mistakes made when family handles this stuff.

 Mo, without even reading these documents I know the answer to your question, because coincidentally this just came up with my son. Not only can they throw these cases out but if a court proceeding commences and it is found out some years later that a child is improperly represented in court the case can be reopened.

Thank you!

Now, I tend to believe that:

  • They're including "errors" in these legal documents to see if if the public is just swallowing it or someone picks up on the errors;
  • They're building in 'safety measures' in case things turn out the wrong way in order to be able to have decisions revoked.

Thoughts please?[/b]


If there is any validity to the argument that the "mistake" is intentional I would say that the answer would be (b), because this would not only allow Guardians to reopen cases, but also allow the children. The children, if finding out that something was wrong, even after the age of 18, could reopen a case. The test for that, is "When did the guarded child receive notice that the representation was delivered wrong?". For example, my son will be 21, but just in the last 2 months discovered that he was misrepresented on some things. He will be allowed some time to revisit his case, based on that.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.

Mark Twain

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal