Linda Mastro attorney Michael Gossler filed what looks like a hastily prepared appellate brief. No pun intended, but it’s pretty brief – touching on community property law, prenuptial agreements, estate planning and appellate review standards, all very complex subjects, without a whole lot of analysis. (We suspect this is good evidence Gossler is not getting paid and is making his best argument with little to go on).
Recall that the trial court ruled that the jewelry was not her separate property and thus subject to the court’s jurisdiction. Linda Mastro’s brief argues the trial court erred in this respect – and that all the evidence shows that the jewelry was her separate property.
As for the judgments against Linda Mastro related to missing property, like the rings, gold bars, and money from an LLC, she argues that was error too. She argues there was no evidence presented at trial that she had any control or even had knowledge about any of these transactions, and that the signatures related to these transactions, which purported ot be hers, were not actually hers, but Mike Mastro signing for her.
As it stands now, Linda Mastro remains on the lam, assumedly (but not necessarily) with Mike. Also we assumed she has possession of the jewelry (or sold it, and has the cash), which the trial court ruled is not hers.
We can’t wait to read the Trustee’s responsive briefing.