Nitpicky.

I read the Injunction Order for Larry Birkhead to keep Anna's body in Cold Storage.

I have to say... it's a shoddy piece of work.

First off, the first page of the Injunction was filed in Palm Beach County, in the Fifteenth Circuit, not the Seventeenth Circuit, which is Broward County, where she died and where she's currently stored.

Okay, so there's that, and then there begins the actual Motion for Emergency Ex Parte Injunctive Relief, with all the Stamps from Howard C. Forman (who hides cases.)

This injunction is a really boringly written injunction for what's behind it. I mean... you're fighting about a famous person's BODY here! And all I could read was "blah, blah, the subject res... blah blah... Public Policy... blah blah don't make me post a bond..."

CRAPPY INJUNCTION, PEOPLE! Spice it up! The one motion for emegency ex-parte injunctive relief I wrote was a compelling SAGA! And it was GRANTED!

Not ex-parte, but it was still granted.

This motion doesn't look NEARLY as dramatic as it is! Punch! It! Up!

Lastly, there's the Jurat.

People.

PEOPLE, PEOPLE, PEOPLE!

It's not executed correctly. If this were a deed or a Mortgage? I don't think it passes.

I CERTAINLY don't think it's well executed for a Verified Injunction.

Know why? Because verified injunctions have to be sworn before a Notary. Let's start from the top of the Certificate, shall we?

State of California )
) :ss
County of ) < -- You need to fill that in. Ya didn't.

Secondly, the dumbass Nancy Josephson wasn't supposed to put HER NAME in the certification, but Larry Birkhead's name in, and that HE produced a driver's license. Not her. She didn't take an Oath. Did Larry? We don't know whether he did or not, because the Notarial Certification is done incorrectly. This isn't some crappy case in County Court, this is a Motion for Injunctive Relief in Circuit Court. Injunctions are already subject to heightened scrutiny... so... if I were defending against this injunction... the first point I'd raise is that I'd come out bullets blazing on this Injunction that it wasn't verified correctly.

And then... you know... the fact that they don't explicitly show all the elements of injunctive relief, rather they just throw them in there "Inadequate remedy at law... Furthers the Public Policy of the State..."

For such a high-profile case, it's a bad injunction. I'm disappointed.

That's my two cents.