Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 9/2/2020 6:19 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk, By H. Suh, Deputy Clerk
1 SAMUEL D. INGHAM III State Bar #66279 2 444 South Flower Street Suite 4260 3 Los Angeles, California 90071-2966
4 Telephone: (310) 556-9751 Fax: (310) 556-1311 5 E-mail: [email protected]
6 Court-Appointed Counsel For BRITNEY JEAN SPEARS, Conservatee 7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11 In the Matter of the No. BP 108 870 Conservatorship of the Person 12 and Estate of CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO: CONSERVATOR'S MOTION TO SEAL 13 Assigned To: 14 Judge BRENDA J. PENNY BRITNEY JEAN SPEARS, Department: 4 15 Hearing Date: 9/16/20 Time: 9:30 a.m. 16 Culendar #: 2002
17
18 Conservatee.
19
20 Conservatee, BRITNEY JEAN SPEARS ("BRITNEY" or
1 21 "Objector" ), hereby objects to the "MOTION TO SEAL PLEADINGS
22 RELATED TO THE PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CO-CONSERVATOR OF THE
23 ESTATE AND REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING ON PETITION FOR
24 APPOINTMENT OF CO-CONSERVATOR OF THE ESTATE" filed by JAMES P.
25 SPEARS on August 19, 2020 ("the Wallet Appointment Sealing
26 Motion") . 27 1 28 For convenience, this pleading will refer to members of the SPEARS family by their first names. No disrespect is intended.
1 110718 vi CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 1. Introduction
2 In a very recent published interview, JAMES is
3 quoted with regard to this conservatorship as saying "It's up to
4 the Court of California to decide what's best for my daughter. It's
5 no one else's business. " 2 His counsel have done their best to
6 i mplement this view, fil i ng no fewer than eight separate motions to
7 seal since July 2019 according to the Court's online Register of
8 Actions. 3
9 The Wallet Appoi ntment Sealing Motion pertains to
10 the "PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CO-CONSERVATOR OF THE ESTATE"
11 filed by JAMES seeking the reappointment of resigned conservator
12 ANDREW M. WALLET as conservator of the estate ("the Wallet
13 Appointment Petition"). BRITNEY has filed a competing petition to
14 appoint BESSEMER TRUST COMPANY OF CAL I FORN I A, N.A. She will also be
15 filing objections to the Wallet Appointment Petition.
16 As set forth below, Objector will demonstrate that
17 t h e Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion is not supported by either
18 the facts or the law i n this case. Moreover, BRITNEY strongly
19 believes it is consistent not only with her personal best interests
20 but also with good public policy generally that the decision to
21 appoint a new conservator of her estate be made in as open and
22 transparent a manner as possible. The sealing motion is supposedly
23 being brought by her father to "protect" BRITNEY's interests, but
24 she is adamantly opposed to i t . Therefore, the Wallet Appointment
25 Sealing Motion should be denied. 26 2 27 Page Six, August 1, 2 020, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference (emphasis added). 28 3 www.lacourt.org
2 I 10718 vl CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 2 • Appointment of Counsel
2 By Order dated February 1, 2008, SAMUEL D. INGHAM
3 III was appointed by this Court to serve as counsel for the
4 conservatee, BRITNEY JEAN SPEARS. He has not been discharged and
5 continues to serve in that capacity.
6
7 3. The Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion
8 The Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion runs some 25
9 pages, but it is virtually identical to the sealing motions JAMES
10 has filed many times before in this case. It is all essentially
11 boilerplate, with no discussion whatsoever of t he specific issues
12 to be raised by the Wallet Appointment Petition or why they might
13 affect any legitimate privacy interest of BRITNEY.
14 In deciding the Wallet Appointment Petition and
15 BRITNEY's competing petition, the Court will be choosing between a
16 semi-retired attorney who resigned suddenly after serving as her
17 conservator for many years and a highly regarded corporate
18 fiduciary that is new to the case. We search the sealing motion in
19 vain for a hint of why this choice would in any way involve
20 BRITNEY's "private health and medical information, and private
21 information concerning Ms. Spears and her minor children, as well
22 as Ms. Spears' attorney-client protected information, proprie tary 23 information and trade secrets (collectively referred to as the 24 'Confidential Information') ."4
25 Ill
26 I I I 27
28 4 Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion, page 7, lines 10-13.
3 110718 vi CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 1 The Wallet Appointment Petition its elf was placed by
2 JAMES entirely in the public domain but for a single requested
5 3 redaction: the address of BRITNEY' s mother in Attachment 11 •
4 However, the addresses of BRITNEY'S brother, sister, two sons and
5 ex-husband were all shown as "verified contact information withheld
6 for privacy." One can be forgiven for concluding that JAMES was
7 simply looking for something to redact in order to bootstrap his
8 motion to seal. 9
10 4. Sealing Not Supported By Applicable Law
11 With very few limited exceptions, California
12 law provides presumptively for public access to judicial records
13 and proceedings because the public has a legitimate interest in
14 understanding how its court system operates. The California
15 Constitution states broadly that "(t]he people have the right of
16 access to information concerning the conduct of the people's
17 business, and, therefore, the meetings of public officials and
18 agencies shall be open to public scrutiny." Cal.Const., art. I, §3,
19 subd. (b) (1). The Constitution further requires that "[a] statute,
20 court rule, or other authority, including those in effect on the
21 effective date of this subdivision, shall be broadly construed if
22 it furthers the people's right of access, and narrowly construed if
23 it limits the right of access .... " Cal. Const., art. I, §3, subd.
24 (b) (2).)
25 I I I
26 I I I 27
28 5 Page 2, lines 18-19.
4 110718 vl CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL Case law is clear that probate records generally
2 fall within the presumption of public access, even when purely
3 business considerations would dictate privacy. For example, Copley
4 Press, Inc. V. Superior Court (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 367, 376, which
5 stated "[n] o statute exempts probate files from the status of
6 public records". See also Estate of Hearst (1977), 67 Cal.App.3d. 7 777.
8 The leading case in this area is NBC Subsidiary
9 (KNBC-TV) v. Superior Court (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1178. However, the
10 Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion, after paying lip service to this
11 authority, simply turns a blind eye to its obvious application to
12 disallow a sealing motion in this case. The NBC opinion establishes
13 a five part test which has been incorporated into California Rules
14 of Court, Rule 2.550. Under this Rule, a record may be sealed only
15 if the Court expressly finds facts that establish:
16 (1) there exists an overriding interest that
17 overcomes the right of public access to the record;
18 ( 2) the overriding interest supports sealing the
19 record;
20 (3) substantial probability exists that the
21 overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed;
22 (4) the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and
23 (5) no less restrictive means exist to achieve the
24 overriding interest.
25 The California Constitution requir es that the Court construe these
26 rules in a manner favoring a right of access to court filings. Cal.
27 Const., art. I, § 3, subd. (b); Mercury Interactive Corp. v. Klein
28 (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 60, 101; Savaglio v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
5 110718 vl CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 588, 597- 600.
2 As noted above, JAMES offers nothing at all to
3 support his conclusionary statement that choosing a new conservator
4 for her estate will necessarily involve "private health and medical
5 information, and private information concerning Ms. Spears and her
6 minor children, as well as Ms. Spears' attorney-client protected
7 information, proprietary information and trade secrets (collec-
8 • tively referred to as the 'Confidential Information')". 6 There are
9 no medical issues at all in a conservatorship of the estate, nor
10 are her children involved in any way. Any confidential financial
11 information (including "trade secrets") is already protected by
12 motions to seal previously granted or still pending. JAMES tacitly
13 admits as much by fling a redacted schedule of assets as part of
14 the Wallet Appointment Petition. Moreover, it is presumptuous to
15 say the least for JAMES to assert the attorney-client privile ge
16 when BRITNEY is independently represented and holds her own
17 privilege.
18 Thus, BRITNEY has no "overriding interest" at all,
19 so the Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion must inevitably fail the
20 first three tests of the NBC case. Even if there were such an
21 interest, there is not even a superficial effort by JAMES to offer
22 a either "narrowly tailored" sealing mechanism or a "less restric-
23 tive" means. Both the sealing motion and the supporting declaration
24 of counsel flatly assert that the complete sealing of all "plead-
25 ings, reports, evaluations, documents or other information filed
26 with the Court related to the Petition For Appointment (callee-
27 28 6 Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion, page 7, lines 10-13.
6 I 10718 vi CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 1 tively, the 'Related Pleadings') and the reporter's transcript of
2 the hearing on the Petition For Appointment (the 'Transcript')" is
3 necessary. Thus, the motion cannot on its face satisfy even one of
4 the five NBC tests. 5
6 5. Cases Cited By JAMES Are Inapplicable
7 Likewise, the authorities relied on by JAMES either 8 do not apply to this probate conservatorship or do not support the
9 propositions for which they are cited.
10 The Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion asserts that
11 "there is no constitutional right of access to conservatorship
12 proceedings. " 7 Yet it cites Burkle v. Burkle ( 200 6) 135 Cal. App. 4th
13 1045 which states to the contrary that "probate proceedings" are
14 "presumptively open. " 8
15 Sorensen v. Superior Court (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th
16 409, also relied upon by JAMES, dealt with a conservatorship for
17 the gravely disabled under the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act.
18 However, LPS Conservatorships arise under a completely different
19 statutory scheme that makes them presumptively nonpublic. 9
20 Another of JAMES' cases, People v. Dixon (2007) 148
21 Cal.App.4th 414, wanders even farther afield, addressing privacy
22 concerns in a civil commitment proceeding under the Sexually
10 23 Violent Predators Act • Its passing remarks about "involuntary 24
25 7 Page 8, line 15 26 8 135 Cal.App.4th at 1058 27 9 Welf. & Inst. Code §5118 28 10 Welf. & Inst. Code §§6600 et seq.
7 110718 vi CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 1 civil commitment proceedings" and juvenile dependency proceedings
2 clearly have no persuasive value here. 3
4 6. Conclusion
5 BRITNEY's conservatorship has attracted an unprece-
6 dented level of scrutiny from mainstream media and social media
7 alike. Far from being a conspiracy theory or a "joke" as JAMES
8 reportedly told the media, in large part this scrutiny is a
9 reasonable and even predictable result of JAMES' aggressive use of
10 the sealing procedure over the years to minimize the amount of
11 meaningful information made available to the public. Whatever
12 merits his strategy might have had years ago when BRITNEY was
13 trying to restart her career, at this point in her life when she is
14 trying to regain some measure of personal autonomy, BRITNEY
15 welcomes and appreciates the informed support of her many fans.
16 Although the sealing motion is supposedly for her "protection",
17 BRITNEY herself is vehemently opposed to this effort by her father
18 to keep her legal struggle hidden away in the closet as a family
19 secret. 20 The moment that JAMES obtained from this Court the
21 power to handle BRITNEY's affairs on her behalf, he surrendered a
22 large measure of privacy as to the manner in which he exercises
23 that power. Transparency is an essential component in order for
24 this Court to earn and retain the public's confidence with respect
25 to protective proceedings like this one. In this case, it is not an
26 exaggeration to say that the whole world is watching. 27 /// 28 ///
8 110718 vl CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL 1 For the foregoing reasons, Objector respectfully
2 requests that the Wallet Appointment Sealing Motion be denied. 3 Dated: September 2, 2020 4 5
\DOO‘HJONM-h-UJNH 6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
MMNMMNMMM—m—Hp—bu—I—u—ufla— 18mquhWMPCWW‘QONMfiWN—‘O
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 28
9
110718”0718 viv1 CONSERVATEE'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBIT A 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory'
EXCLUSIVE Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory' August 1, 2020 I 11:00am
Jamie Spears is sick and tired of how #FreeBritney - an increasingly vocal on!ine movement claiming his daughter Britney Spears is a prisoner in a gilded cage - is painting him as a villain.
An upset Jamie, 68, told The Post that the campaign, which posits him as a cruel and opportunistic father keeping the 38- year-old pop princess under his emotional and financial control in a 12-year-long legal conservatorship, "is a joke."
"Al l these conspiracy theorists don't know anything. The world don't have a clue," he said. "It's up to the court of California to decide what's best for my daughter. It's no one else's business." Jamie angrily denied long-standing rumors that he or anyone else is skimming money off the top of Britney's estate.
"I have to report every nickel and dime spent to the court every year," he said. "How the hell would I steal something?"
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/01/britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&ut. .. 1/6 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory'
,,
i·." =• ,,!'"'"·,..,.,...,,.,,_ ..r. . . (.,./
/nve~. i. ..tJ~~t~ ·-:- · :~ . . . . ' i►~~. .
A sign that reads "Jail Jamie, Free Britney, Investigate Lou" sits on the ground as supporters of Britney Spears gather outside a courthouse in downtown for a #FreeBritney protest as a hearing regarding Spears' conservatorship is in session on July 22, 2020
The dad sa id what really bothers him is the aggressiveness of the #FreeBritney supporters. "People are being stalked and targeted with death threats," he said. "It's horrible. We don't want those kinds of fans.
"I love my daughter," Jamie continued, getting emotional. "I love all my kids. But this is our business. It's private."
Britney's life and struggles, however, have long played out in public.
And recently, celebrities including Ruby Rose, Miley Cyrus, Paris Hilton, Ariel Winter and Rose McGowan have lent their support to the #FreeBritney movement, lnstagramming and tweeting about how the singer is allegedly unable to make her own decisions about her career, personal life and health because of the ongoing conservatorship.
"Her father doesn't allow her to drive, all of her calls & messages are monitored, she's not allowed to vote, hang with anyone or spend her money without permission. And if she breaks a 'rule' he threatens to have her kids taken away," claims one cf:Em ge.oi·g petiUoi ., with more than 100,000 signatures, lobbying for Britney's freedom.
The #FreeBritney crusaders have blasted social media with posts, purporting to show that Jamie claimed Britney had dementia in 2008, and that Jamie and the star's business manager, Lou Taylor of Tri Star Sports and Management, are - embezzling from her.
Lately, Britney's camp has started striking back: Taylor, who did not return calls from The Post, recently settled with #FreeBritney supporter Bryan Kuchar after suing him last year for creating Web sites that called Taylor the "mastermind controlling the pop star."
A number of Spears insiders insist that the star is not a helpless pawn.
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/01 /britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/?utm_sourceaaurl_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&ut. .. 2/6 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory'
Britney Spears
"Absolutely not," Charlie Ebersol, who dated Britney for eight months in 2015, told The Post. As for the wild rumor that Jamie hires his daughter's boyfriends and pays them $1,000 a week to date her, Ebersol said: "Not [true] in any way, shape or form."
One insider said that while Jamie is "not perfect," he "really stepped up for Britney."
The conservatorship, which put much of the star's decision-making into the hands of Jamie and lawyers, was established 12 years ago, after Britney's very public meltdown.
At the time, it was meant to be temporary. But the fact that it's gone on so long makes some question who is really benefiting from it. Those close to the singer, however, say that Britney is more comfortable with - and ambivalent about - the situation than people realize.
"It's not at all a conservatorship like you read about for old people," said the insider. "It protects her in a way people like Michael Jackson weren't protected, from themselves and from other people. She's been able to perform all this time because performing is where she is happiest.
Supporters of Britney Spears gather outside a courthouse in downtown for a #FreeBritney protest as a hearing regarding Spears' conservatorship is in session on July 22, 2020 in Los Angeles, California.
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/01/britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&ut... 3/6 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory' "When she's left to her own devices is where the trouble starts. She does have some serious issues."
Born in Mississippi and raised in Louisiana, Britney rocketed to stardom at age 17 with her first single, "... Baby One More Time" and remained one of the most popular artists of the next few years.
Her first eyebrow-raising behavior was in 2004, when she married a childhood pal on a whim and got an annulment 55 hours later because, according to court documents, she "lacked understanding of her actions."
But things really began to unravel in 2006, after she had wed backup dancer Kevin Federline and given birth to their eldest son, Sean. Child Services repeatedly checked in on the family, including after the baby fell out of a high chair and was seen in a vehicle on Britney's lap rather than in a car seat.
The next year was a whirlwind of unhinged TV appearances; a marriage split (and subsequent divorce) two months after the birth of her second son, Jayden, with Federline; and worrisome paparazzi photos of Britney partying hard with Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan.
Then, in early 2007, Britney checked in and quickly out of rehab, showed up at a Los Angeles beauty shop and shaved off her hair, and attacked a paparazzo's car with an umbrella. She went back to rehab, gave a jaw-droppingly sad performance at the VMAs, was booked on hit-and-run charges (later dropped) and lost custody of her children to Federline.
That seemed to be the straw that truly broke her. In January 2008, Britney was hauled away in an ambulance after a three hour police standoff in which she refused to return her sons to Federline's custody.
Weeks later, she was again taken to a hospital and placed on a psychiatric hold - leading a Los Angeles court to declare her father her legal conservator to handle virtually all her affairs.
https ://pagesix.com/2020/08/01 /b ritney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspi racy-theory /?utm_sou rce=u rl_siteb uttons&utm_ mediu m=site buttons&ut. . . 4/6 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory'
1xy
Singer Britney Spears and Charlie Ebersol arrive at the 2015 Billboard Music Awards
During the past 12 years, she has been allowed to make records, tour and even have a Las Vegas concert residency - leading many to speculate: If she can work, why isn't she allowed to make her decisions?
When asked whether Britney is mentally unstable, ex-boyfriend Ebersol was resolute: "Absolutely not," he said. That statement was echoed by other former boyfriends including David Lucado, who dated her in 2014. {Britney is now dating Iranian-born bodybuilder Sam Asghari, 26.)
Adam Streisand agrees. The Los Angeles-based lawyer was hired by Britney in 2008 after her hospitalization, until a doctor reported that she was not competent enough to choose her own lawyer and the court appointed her a new one.
He told The Post that, even when she was near rock bottom, Britney did not appear crazy, "just agitated. She understood the concept of a conservatorship but just did not want her father to be the conservator." Nonetheless, Streisand does not believe that Jamie or the business managers have been skimming money from Britney. It's believed that her fortune, said to be anywhere from $60 million to $215 million, was placed in a trust as part of the conservatorship.
"Jamie's a weird guy, he's a control freak," Streisand said. "But I don't see him as some sort of criminal mastermind in this."
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/01/britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&ut. .. 5/6 8/13/2020 Britney Spears' dad calls #FreeBritney a 'conspiracy theory' The Spears family is splintered, however. Last summer, Jamie was temporarily removed from the conservatorship after he alisgeciiy broke drnNn a door 2nd fFSbbed Sea,·1 during an altercation, resulting in a restraining order that forbids him from seeing Britney's two sons. In March, Jayden i2shed out against Jamie on lnstagram. Britney's mom, Lynne, who divorced Jamie in 2002, has reportedly liked at least one #FreeBritney post. Last week, Britney's brother, Bryan, said that the star wanted out of the conservatorship - but that "it has been a great thing for our family."
The next hearing on the conservatorship is to be held Aug. 22, and it's unclear what Britney herself wants to come of it.
Meanwhile, some are beginning to wonder if maybe Britney herself is toying with fans.
While no one disputes her mental-health struggles, Britney has had a knack for masterminding key aspects of her career ever since she came up with the concept of wearing a Catholic-schoolgirl uniform for the video of her first smash hit, "... Baby One More Time," when she was only 17.
By design or not, some say the notoriously agoraphobic singer now stars in a shrewdly curated lnstagram feed that keeps her in the public eye without her ever having to leave home.
Her feed is a mix of inspirational bromides, kittenish dancing and provocative, New Age-type musings from which #FreeBritney believers seek :)dit,r
"I feel like every post is cryptic code for something ... " Nicolle Ronayne commented on an lnstagram photo Britney posted about the "Pink Planet... aka GJ 504b.. . the planet made of pink gas!"
!..~';; britneyspears •, .,Wf 26m followers
301,067 likes britneyspears
This is the PINK PLANET .... aka GJ 504b ... the planet made of pink gas!!!!! It's even four times more massive than Jupiter!!!!! Can I just go here already @9 .e-@ !?!? vi ew all 8,102 comments
Add a comment ..
https://pagesix. com/2020/08/01 /britney-spears-dad-calls-freebritney-a-conspiracy-theory/?utm_source=url_sitebultons&utm_medium=site buttons&ut .. , 6/6