- The major players in Britney Spears’ conservatorship case are having ongoing disagreements in court.
- The temporary conservators are saying Jamie Spears didn’t follow proper procedure after termination.
- In turn, Jamie’s lawyer says Britney’s team are “attacking” him and presenting “alternative facts.”
The major players in Britney Spears’ conservatorship case are firing barbs at one another in new court filings.
The temporarily assigned conservators — Jodi Montgomery and John Zabel — filed a joint statement to the court saying that Jamie Spears (Britney’s father and terminated co-conservator) had proposed an order following the termination of the conservatorship that was “riddled with misstatements.”
Jamie’s lawyer has now responded, accusing Montgomery and Zabel of “fruitless attempts to delay termination of the Conservatorship for the purpose of perpetuating the media circus surrounding these proceedings, securing their fifteen minutes of fame, and baselessly attacking Jamie and his reputation.”
Though the pop star’s conservatorship was terminated last month, there are still loose ends that need to be tied up in Los Angeles court. The new court filings that outline disagreements about the best way to proceed as the final court dates in Britney’s conservatorship case are approached (taking place on December 8 and then January 19, 2022).
The thrust of the disagreement seems to be the result of both Jamie’s lawyer and Britney’s lawyer filing “proposed orders,” which summarize the termination agreement and next steps. Jamie’s lawyer says he didn’t receive Britney’s filing right away because her lawyer, Mathew Rosengart, misspelled the email address for the law firm.
Britney’s temporary conservators say her father didn’t follow proper procedure after the legal guardianship was ended
Jamie’s proposed order was filed on November 17, five days after the judge ruled that Britney’s conservatorship would be terminated.
The next day, November 18, attorneys for Montgomery and Zabel filed “joint objections” to Jamie’s proposal. They opened the document by saying they were together presenting “their objections to the incorrect, grossly misleading, and procedurally improper proposed order submitted by James P. Spears.”
Attorneys representing the temporary conservators alleged that Jamie Spears “had planted a term in Ms. Spears’s prior estate planning documents which would have kept her [Britney Spears] unnecessarily tethered to the Court in order to make basic estate planning changes for herself.”
“Mr. Spears, the disgraced, suspended former conservator who continues to improperly seek to bolster his reputation at his daughter’s expense, has shown that he is not such a reasonable person,” they added.
In the filing, the attorneys took issue with Jamie Spears’ proposed order, claiming there is a lack of acknowledgment for the role that Zabel is filling in preparing a new trust for Britney Spears.
The conservators also accuse Jamie Spears of “dilatory and disorganized production of files, which fail to include his communications concerning the alleged contemporaneous, real-time eavesdropping on phones used by Ms. Spears,” as well as failing to produce alleged records related to “placing an illicit listening device in Ms. Spears’s bedroom to capture intimate communications.”
Insider reached out to lawyers representing Britney Spears, John Zabel, Jamie Spears, and Jodi Montgomery for comment.
Jamie’s lawyer says the ‘personal attacks’ on Britney’s father were ‘unwarranted’ and calls Britney’s own objections ‘alternative facts’
Jamie’s counsel disagreed with the conservator’s and Rosengart’s objections to his proposed order in a December 6 filing submitted by attorneys Alex Weingarten and Eric J. Bakewell, his new counsel at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP.
“Jamie’s counsel did not receive the filing until it arrived by mail on December 1, 2021,” they wrote in the document. “This appears to be because Britney’s counsel did not spell ‘Willkie’ correctly when inputting the email address of Jamie’s counsel.”
The declaration bashed the conservators’ proposed termination plan and said that Zabel and Montgomery “are looking for a seat on the bandwagon of trashing Jamie based on zero evidence and without even one word of support from the hearing transcript or the Court’s minute orders for their slanderous attack on Jamie.”
“Jamie continues to produce all thirteen years of documents and communications (and has already produced over 115,900 documents, spanning 58 boxes of paper records and over 478,000 pages),” Jamie’s counsel added. “The alternative facts that Temporary Conservators and Britney attempt to create simply do not exist.”
For more on the open-ended questions of financial and administrative decisions for Britney Spears’ estate, read Insider’s report here on all of the main people who’ve been paid by Britney Spears’ financial estate during her 13 years of conservatorship.