Isn't it interesting with facts like this available, reich wingers just aren't interested in reading about them!<quoted text>
In regards to Breitbart re Sherrod:
On September 18, 2013, the following motion was filed in the U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; Case 1:11-cv-00477-RJL. It paints a very clear picture of the game that Breitbart's widow has been playing:
"Plaintiff Shirley Sherrod respectfully moves to substitute “Susannah Breitbart, as successor to Andrew Breitbart, Deceased” in place of now-deceased Defendant Andrew Breitbart. In support of the Motion,
Plaintiff states as follows:
1. On February 11, 2011, Plaintiff Shirley Sherrod filed this lawsuit in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia against Andrew Breitbart, Larry O’Connor, and a person indentified in the Complaint as JOHN DOE, alleging claims for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. On March 4, 2011, Defendants Breitbart and O’Connor filed a Notice of Removal [Dkt. 1] to this Court.
2. Although a formal suggestion of death was never made on the record in this Court, Plaintiff believes based on media reports that Mr. Breitbart passed away on March 1, 2012.
3. Responding to the Court’s inquiries on the status of any estate regarding Mr. Breitbart, on October 31, 2012, Mr. Breitbart’s former counsel represented to the Court that “[n]o estate has been opened; and, there are no pending or imminent plans to open an estate for
Mr. Breitbart.” Oct. 31, 2012 Report [Dkt. 60]. Mr. Breitbart’s former counsel did not identify to the Court a representative or successor who may be substituted as a party.
4. On June 25, 2013, the D.C. Circuit affirmed this Court’s ruling denying Defendant’s motion to dismiss under the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act.[D.C. Cir.# 1443072]. The mandate issued on August 6, 2013.[Dkt. 64].
5. On September 4, 2013, Mr. Breitbart’s former counsel served a letter on Plaintiff’s counsel stating that “[w]e have confirmed with counsel for Mr. Breitbart’s widow, Ms. Susannah Breitbart, that no estate has been opened for or with regard to Mr. Breitbart; and, thus, no executor, trustee, successor, or other legal representative has been appointed to administer Mr. Breitbart’s post-mortem affairs.” The letter further provided that the “heirs of / successors to” Mr. Breitbart are Ms. Susannah Breitbart and her four minor children.
6. Plaintiff’s lawsuit against Mr. Breitbart was timely filed, survives his death, and may be continued against his successor. See D.C. Code § 12-101; Sinito v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 176 F.3d 512, 516 (D.C. Cir. 1999); McSurely v. McClellan, 753 F.2d 88, 98-99 (D.C. Cir. 1985)(holding spouses of decedents were “proper parties” for substitution); see also Cal. Probate Code § 13550 (“Except as provided in Sections 11446, 13552-54, upon the death of a married person, the surviving spouse is personally liable for the debts of the deceased spouse chargeable against the property described in Section 13551..."); Estate of Bonanno v. Connolly...(“[A] surviving spouse who receives a decedent’s property without administration becomes personally liable or decedent’s debts chargeable against such property, within limits.”).
7. At the 9/13/13 status conference, the Court requested that Plaintiff submit her motion for substitution by September 18, 2013. Counsel for Defendant O’Connor provided copies of two insurance policies to Plaintiff on September 13, 2013, and Plaintiff has inquired further about the amount of coverage remaining. Plaintiff reserves her right to amend this request as discovery proceeds and additional information comes to light, including with...
Come to think of it, even fart news isn't interested! And you don't hear non cons complaining about them not reporting!