Celebrity Justice
Fed Judge to Brit -- You're Outta Here!

A federal judge has ruled the Feds have no business in Britney's conservatorship case and it has been sent back to state court.
Read the docs
Federal District Judge Philip Gutierrez ruled Jon Eardley, the attorney who claimed to rep Brit, "had no authority to remove the case from state court."

The judge added, "Mr. Eardley is not Ms. Spears attorney and acted improperly by removing her conservatorship proceeding to federal court."

The court did not award the conservatorship attorneys fees, which means it will cost Brit around $40,000 for what turned out to be a bogus case.

Reader Comments

(Page 6 of 11) Previous 15 Comments | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

76. britaculous, lawdawg, vintage: Good talking with you tonight. I am leaving the practice of law to go home and feed my beautiful St. Bernard whose name is Bella!!! See ya - Bella

Posted at 9:06PM on Feb 26th 2008 by Bella

77. Britney should sue Eardley, if for no other reason than being a Complete A-Hole, Media Mongering, Idiot !!

Posted at 9:15PM on Feb 26th 2008 by Jeff

78. Would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at the Sands deposition. Phillips is interested in Sands' public claims that he was hired to smear dirt on Britney's reputation. She is interested in the relationship between K-Fed and Sands, not between Sands and Lutfi. Phillips is only interested in what advances the custody/visitation case for her client, and I doubt Lutfi is part of that strategy.

Kaplan is nervous because the questions will delve into conversations that he believes should be covered byt he attorney-client privilege. That opens a Pnadora's box all by itself. If Sands was hired by Kaplan, there is a case to be made that Sands was an agent of the lawyer and therefore all communications that Sands was privy to, particularly between Sands and Kaplan and Sands and K-Fed, do fall within the privilege. The only person who can waive the privilege is K-Fed -- the client owns the privilege. Stacy Phillips will no doubt seek a court ruling that the privilege does not apply, and so Sands would have to answer the questions she poses. She can even suspend the deposition and get the judge on the phone for an on-the-spot ruling, although the court would probably want the parties to file briefs before making a ruling on the privilege issue.

It sure will be interesting. This whole case has been like a law schoool test question, raising almost every kind of issue imaginable -- family law, probate, civil procedure, mental health law, federal/state jurisdiction -- you name it, it's in there.

Posted at 9:18PM on Feb 26th 2008 by lawdawg

79. Britney is Sick, Sick and tired of fighting for what is right, Britney's problem is money alot of money and family members need alot of her money x husband father mother all of them this is all about GREED simple GREED a picture of our society evidence of our courts are driven by the power of the dollar she should just pay her daddy and mommy alot of money and leave the country oh we cant forget the x he would need alot to give her the freedom she seeks. I think she should give it all away than they would leave her alone she could leave the country and start a new with out all the Greedy bastards sucking the life out of her. She is sick sick and tired of fighting for what is right.

Posted at 9:58AM on Feb 27th 2008 by sandy

80. britaculous, will you please be my life partner????

Posted at 9:23PM on Feb 26th 2008 by Bella

81. Exactly why I'm wondering why he's talking about Sam. Unless Sam's depo raised something?!

But in the Sands privilege. Think TMZ posted a letter about wanting copies of everything before the depo - so would he not have had to file something about the privilege by now?

Good point at the end - I think law professors should keep their students updated with this. Like or hate Brtiney, it's certainle a good way to remember things! Am about to study trusts estate and land... not in Cali. Would help! Quite a dry subject matter. esp here!!!

Posted at 9:24PM on Feb 26th 2008 by britaculous

82. Finally some interesting reading on tmz. Good work lawdawg, britaculous, bella !

Posted at 9:43PM on Feb 26th 2008 by bill

83. britaculous: What exactly is Sands saying now? I don't go to x17 because it filled my laptop with spyware I couldn't get rid of until I bombed the hard drive. Sands was originally served a notice of his deposition when he was still working for Kaplan, and at that time his attorney, Randolf Wright, speculated that Britney's legal team (then Trope & Trope) was trying to discover dirt about k-Fed's lifestyle. The attorney made the following comments: "That would make sense," Wright said. "Why else bring in a top media consultant hired for Kevin's case and try to depose him? It seems to me they are trying to find out about the relationship between my client and Kevin Federline." He also added Britney's lawyers will gain very little by grilling Sands. "My guess," said Wright, "is that is will be a very short deposition."

Funny that Sands is now singing a different tune.

Posted at 9:33PM on Feb 26th 2008 by lawdawg

84. haha very funny........

Posted at 9:34PM on Feb 26th 2008 by britaculous

85. Hey, signing off for now. It's late and I need to go home. I think I'm the only one left at the office. britaculous and Bella, I'll check in later for the latest of your blogs.

Posted at 9:38PM on Feb 26th 2008 by lawdawg

86. Oh geez. Funny board.

Posted at 9:45PM on Feb 26th 2008 by Kelli

87. Lawdawg. I found this. But I remember there being some theory that T&T wanted to get to the bottom of what Sands was hired to do - i.e. muddy Brit's name.....
"..."Sands cryptically told TMZ, "I'm honored to work with a patriot like Sam Lutfi." BTW, while Sands worked for Kaplan, his mission was partly to dig up dirt on Brit's former manager. For his part, Lutfi told TMZ, "Michael did his research and found the truth." ..."

Maybe both is true - they wanna know whether he was on a smear campaign AND what he knows about Lutfi......

Posted at 9:48PM on Feb 26th 2008 by britaculous

88. I'm not quite sure I understand why Brittney has to pay for court costs when this guy acted on his own. Can someone help me out. It seems to me that she's being held accountable in error. Am I missing something?

Posted at 9:53PM on Feb 26th 2008 by allie

89. y should it cost britney any money he is not even her lawyer these people whom make these claims are sucking money right out of this women they not her should be responsible for the 40,000 bill not a fan but just seems unfair to charge her and not that attorney

Posted at 9:59PM on Feb 26th 2008 by justme

90. Don't mind me, I will just observe all your legal minds. I am here in peace and will not bother, continue..

Posted at 9:58PM on Feb 26th 2008 by Kelli

Previous 15 Comments | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments