UPDATE (9/28): Britney Spears’ attorney, Mathew S. Rosengart, hit back at Jamie Spears after the singer’s father objected to anyone replacing him as a temporary curator as the guardianship ends. The comments were contained in a footnote to a legal brief that otherwise opposed another Jamie case regarding compensation for the Curator and his lawyers (which Rosengart also objected to).
In the footnote, Rosengart dismissed Jamie’s claim that his potential replacement, John Zabel, was unqualified. Rosengart said Zabel “is a highly esteemed and nationally recognized award-winning CPA with an impeccable record of service in positions of trust – in stark contrast to Mr. Sears, an alcoholic and gambling addict with no financial background. or experience in financial matters, who has previously filed for bankruptcy and has a domestic violence restraining order currently in effect against him.
Rosengart went on to say that Jamie “wants to escape justice and responsibility (but won’t) and he will obviously do or say anything to avoid it.”
Britney Spears’ father Jamie Spears has expressed his opposition to the possibility of someone replacing him as the pop star’s temporary curator in new court documents filed on Tuesday, September 28.
The filing comes a day before arguably the most important hearing in Spears’ battle for trusteeship – on whether to remove Jamie from trusteeship. And while Jamie had previously filed a motion to end his tenure as the court-appointed conservator of his daughter’s estate, the new filing specifically opposes any potential replacement.
In the case, Jamie’s lawyers argued that “there is no need for a temporary curator because there is no vacant position in the post of curator” and that “Mr. Spears has not and should not be suspended, especially since the trusteeship is expected to end soon.
The lawsuit continued: âIn addition, all parties have consented to the end of the guardianship. Assuming the court agrees with the parties and ends the trusteeship, the petition for a temporary curator should be dismissed without prejudice as moot. Whatever remains to be done to end the trusteeship of the estate must be done as effectively as possible, by Mr. Spears, who is familiar with the assets of the custodial field and the attention that each asset requires, and without an abrupt, unnecessary and costly transfer of custody of assets to a complete stranger in guardianship.
To that end, the file argued that the proposed temporary curator, John Zabel, was unqualified to oversee Spears’ estate. He claimed that Zabel, despite being a Chartered Accountant, is not a Chartered Professional Trustee and “does not appear to have the background and experience to take over a complex $ 60 million trusteeship area ( approximately) on temporary or immediate land. base. âHe also claimed that Zabel was not qualified to be Spears’ curator because in 2007 he allegedly invested $ 1 million of his own money in a real estate scam.
“While it is unfortunate that Mr Zabel was scammed,” the file read, “the point is that he did not acknowledge the scam in the hope of making a return on his investment 20%, and he did not do his due diligence before investing over a million of his own money, which is of great concern Mr. Spears is not sure if Ms. Spears is aware of these disturbing facts; probably not.
In a statement to Rolling stone, Britney Spears ‘attorney, Mathew S. Rosengart, called Jamie’s case “a desperate effort to distract from Mr. Spears’ blatant incompetence, his misconduct, including the dissipation of funds. , abuse and The New York Times bomb expose. Given that last point, he and his advisers are undoubtedly very worried about having to turn over his cases if he is suspended, which under California law must include attorney-client communications.
The The “bomb” Rosengart refers to is a new documentary report on the alleged surveillance and security apparatus Jamie has set up to monitor the pop star. Rosengart addressed the new revelations in a filing on Monday, September 27, calling the alleged surveillance “deeply troubling” and saying Jamie had “crossed unfathomable lines.”