November 7th, 2007
By PHATLAW Staff

PHATLAW sources reveal that Howard K. Stern has won a victory in his fight against Rita Cosby. PHATLAW readers will likely recall that the attorney turned lover of Anna Nicole Smith has filed a defamation suit against the former MSNBC anchor who wrote a tell-all book about the former PLAYBOY Playmate. The defamation suit alleges that Cosby defamed Stern when she alleged in her book that there are witnesses who say there is a video of Stern and Larry Birkhead (aka Baby Daddy to the Money Train) having sex.
The Judge issued a court order on Tuesday wherein Stern is allowed to investigate his allegations that Cosby unduly influenced the witnesses by offering to pay them thousands of dollars. Specifically, the Judge indicated that there is a lot of evidence that Cosby crossed the line in writing her book on Anna Nicole.
If Cosby is found to have unduly influenced witnesses, then Stern will likely be able to support his claims of defamation. In that case, look for the Judge to award Stern substantial sums of money.
PhatThought: In the meantime, PHATLAW would not be surprised if Stern settled this case out of court for a portion of the proceeds from the book. After all, it has been reported that Stern still lives with his parents. So, he could likely use the cash-ola.
PHATLAW will continue to post the latest developments in this case.

Posted in Howard K. Stern, Anna Nicole Smith, Lawsuits | No Comments »|
Email This Post
October 18th, 2007
By PHATLAW Staff

Anna Nicoles’ former psychiatrist Dr. Khristine Eroshevich’s attorneys were recently in a Los Angeles courtroom challenging the validity of a search warrant police used in a raid on her home last week.
According to multiple published reports, several search warrants have been issued authorizing searches on those who may have over-prescribed medications to the buxom blond.
Dr. E’s lawyers challenged the warrants as overly broad and stated several personal items were taken, including CDs!
Under the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution, search warrants must be reasonable and specific—i.e. name the specified object being searched for and the location(s) to be searched. For example, if police we looking for a rocket launcher used in an attack on a group of civilians in a suspects home, police most likely could not open up a small desk drawer…and if they found other contraband in that small drawer when they were not lawfully there such as marijuana or heroin, it would likely be suppressed at a later date.
Too bad for Dr. E the search warrant was looking for evidence of over-prescribed medication. Loose pills floating around could be indicative of such practices and, as Tech Support is very aware, pills are small and can fit almost anywhere—say, under his pile of Hustler magazines in his bathroom or inside the Jabba the Hut figurine perched on his nightstand.
PhatThought: Does Dr. E. have a pill to cure incessant crying and sadness? If so, let us know—we are all worried about Tech Support.
PHATLAW will continue to post the latest developments in this case.

Posted in Anna Nicole Smith | 1 Comment »|
Email This Post