.

Will Thomas Kinkade's Girlfriend Speak After 15-Day Injunction Expires?

Court documents reveal Judge Lucas granted a two-week injunction to prevent the painter's lover from violating confidentiality agreement terms.

A 15-day injunction against the girlfriend of the is set to expire on April 30, leaving questions about whether the artist's lover for the past 18 months will adhere to a confidentiality agreement, a closer inspection of court records reveals.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Patricia M. Lucas signed the order on April 16 prohibiting Amy Pinto-Walsh from making statements or engaging in conduct that has the effect of defaming, criticizing, disparaging or discrediting Kinkade, his widow Nanette Kinkade, or any company owned by Kinkade.

The temporary order is the first document contained in a file at the Santa Clara County Superior Court civil division located at 191 No. First St. in downtown San Jose.

More than 50 pages in the file were copied for Los Gatos Patch by the records office at the courthouse and are included in this story for readers under our photo.

several media outlets around the country picked up the story.

Kinkade, one of the most prolific and financially successful modern-day American painters, died at age 54 on either April 5 or April 6.

The temporary injunction prevents Pinto-Walsh from publishing or assisting in the publishing of any book, article, review, notice, press release, advertisement, public or private communication or report concerning Kinkade, his widow or any company owned by Kinkade.

She's also forbidden from selling, trading, publishing, disclosing, producing, permitting access to or otherwise revealing proprietary information defined in a confidentiality agreement she signed in February 2011 to anyone in any manner whatsoever such as photocopy, reproduction or electronic media.

The injunction was sought by attorneys representing Windermere Holdings, LLC and Kinkade's widow, who is the trustee of the Kinkade Family Trust and executor of Thomas Kinkade's estate.

Attorneys with the Los Angeles-based law firm of Zuber & Taillieu LLP asserted in an ex-parte application attached to the restraining order that Pinto-Walsh violated the confidentiality agreement when she spoke to the press after the painter had died.

The court documents state the painter's date of death occurred the night of April 5 and not the morning of April 6 as had been reported by national media, including Los Gatos Patch.

The court file contains the declarations from five people who state why they feel the injunction should be granted.

Linda Raasch, a Kinkade family friend, wrote in her declaration that after she learned the painter had died, she visited the Monte Sereno Kinkade residence the morning of April 6 to "provide support during what I knew would be a difficult time for the Kinkade family."

When she arrived, she declared, the only people there were the Santa Clara County coroner, Kinkade's former bodyguard Dean Baker and Pinto-Walsh.

During her conversation with Pinto-Walsh, Raasch said she directed her attention to personal photographs, papers and memorabilia belonging to Kinkade concerning his family and said she "intended to release the Kinkade items to the press and to the public."

When she told Pinto-Walsh that disclosing the items to the press and the public would cause great emotional distress to his widow and children, "Pinto-Walsh was unmoved by my entreaty and continued to say she intended to release the Kinkade items to the press and the public."

In his declaration, Baker, the ex-bodyguard, wrote that "on countless occasions" he witnessed Pinto-Walsh make disparaging remarks about Kinkade's wife and daughters.

Baker, who worked for Kinkade from February 2010 to January 2011, stated that Pinto-Walsh was "gathering evidence" to "harm" Kinkade and his business. On one occasion, Baker said Pinto-Walsh threatened Kinkade "along the lines of 'I will tear you down.' "

"I witnessed Ms. Pinto-Walsh act in an impulsive and erratic manner during the course of my assignment," the former bodyguard wrote. "I would expect Ms. Pinto-Walsh to disclose confidential information that would harm Mr. Kinkade's family and businesses should she have the opportunity to do so."

Robert Murray, the attorney representing Windermere Holdings and Pacific Metro, LLC, a.k.a. The Thomas Kinkade Company, also submitted a declaration. Murray said he's been present in meetings that  Pinto-Walsh also attended, during which aspects of Kinkade companies' business plans, strategies, financial information and other private sensitive information were mentioned.

Based on Pinto-Walsh's relationship with Kinkade, Murray said she had access to information regarding Thomas Kinkade Studios' proprietary painting techniques, including paint type, brush techniques and the use of computer technology in painting, according to the court records.

Murray also wrote that Pinto-Walsh regularly received commercially sensitive information regarding the Kinkade businesses, including information about the inner workings and intimate details of the businesses and Kinkade's painting techniques.

On April 9, a medical examiner at the Santa Clara County Coroner's Office said an

Several calls to attorneys representing Windermere Holdings LLC have not been answered. Marcia Horowitz, a publicist with New York-based Rubenstein Associates public relations firm, contacted Los Gatos Patch on Tuesday and said she was a spokeswoman for the Kinkade Trust.

However, Horowitz was not aware that the injunction had been temporarily granted and said she would provide additional information as it became available.

It's not known yet who is representing Pinto-Walsh. Pinto-Walsh has not returned multiple calls from Patch seeking comment about the court papers.

Blessed Assurance June 03, 2012 at 08:03 PM
"Handle" Webster's Dictionary definition of "Handle", a part (as part of a tool) designed to be grasped by the hand.You have so stated that you will not be bullied. However, you have been accused of that and name calling yourself on this blog. You have continuously bullied, attacked other bloggers who do not agree with you, or if their opinion differs from yours. To others, you have demonstrated an imperious attitude ( commanding, Lordly, arrogant, domineering). The title for this article is "Will Girlfriend of Thomas Kinkades Girlfriend Speak After 15-Day Injunction is Over?" This particular article does not address debauchery, fraud, alcoholism, controlled substance abuse, pornography or urinating on Winnie The Pooh. It explores the possiblity of Amy Pinto-Walsh discussing any matter pertaining to William Thomas Kinkade, III, Kinkade Trust, any holding held by the Kinkade Family or the Trust. Santa Clara County Superior Judge Patricia Lucas granted the 15-day injuntion based upon evidence and sworn testimony. Upon which no one would willifully perjure themselves (the voluntary violation of an oath to tell the truth) particularly knowing the consequences of being charged with perjury and the penalty. No one has embarrassed themselves except those who attack the character of a deceased person. Hopefully, the truth will eventually be made public. Yes, Thomas had problems, regrets, made mistakes. There is NOT ONE blogger who has not or does not.
Bite Me June 04, 2012 at 02:35 AM
Blessed Assurance has been right on target! Especially with your BS! You think your the kingpen of this FN discussion!! Get a FN life because you desperately need one. The coroner's report stated "HE ACCIDENTLY OVERDOSED", ALONG WITH "ALCOHOL USE". Get over your FN self. The display of histrionics from you is disgusting.
Wavoka June 04, 2012 at 04:30 AM
As we would expect, MORE NOISE, NO CONTENT. And embarrassingly, you can't even get the NOISE right. The coroner's report DID NOT STATE.... "HE ACCIDENTLY OVERDOSED", ALONG WITH "ALCOHOL USE" RATHER IT STATED.... Kinkade's death was caused by accidental "ACUTE ETHANOL AND DIAZEPAM INTOXICATION" http://losgatos.patch.com/articles/thomas-kinkade-autopsy-lethal-level-of-alcohol-drugs-in-painter-s-body The Alcohol was not a secondary cause, but a primary cause. It was not "USE", it was "ABUSE" = "ACUTE". If you are trying to attack, even if you attack has no rational meaning, at least attempt to get the facts right. You guys continue to embarrass yourselves.
Wavoka June 04, 2012 at 08:55 AM
6:21 pm on Sunday, June 3, 2012 @BA You claim to be in the "legal profession". So what kind of a "legal professional" are you that you are unable to look up a word in the dictionary? Webster's offers six uses for the word "Handle". Maybe you should read past the first one, THINK? Webster's Dictionary: "HANDLE", noun 3. a : title , b : name; also : nickname http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/handle The title of the article is "Will Thomas Kinkade's Girlfriend Speak After 15-Day Injunction Expires?". Yet somehow you are unable to grasp the relevance of the discussion. The silencing of Ms Pinto concerns many, especially the idea of her revealing "trade secrets". That TK had very serious moral and ethical issues the whole of his life, it follows there is a concern about business practices. That sir, is the relevance. The fact that someone passes, does not change the character of that individual. TKs debauchery was widely discussed during his lifetime, so it is unreasonable to expect that discussion will cease upon his passing, especially with consideration of the circumstances, with whom and how he passed. I know you find it offensive that others disagree with you, points out your inconsistencies, your lack of reasonable argument, but that is NOT bullying. Bullying is a accusation you use in an attempt to silence others. If you are truly a legal professional, you have embarrassed yourself, by the continued confusion, misrepresentation, and dishonesty.
Wavoka June 11, 2012 at 08:23 PM
@ Blessed Assurance You are conspicuously absent? You changed your "handle', deleted damaging comments, but as I recall, you intended to shut this blog down, to suspend the 1st amendment. You were in the "legal profession", and "it was time law enforcement got involved". You wanted me to meet you at the police station, you had "credentials". You said "I won't believe who I was up against". Remember? You knew all about everything, assured us Nanette and her attorneys had everything under control, if "you could only tell us what you knew". Your obvious bias was stunning, most notably your prejudice in favor of Nanette, and your dogged interest in prosecuting Ms. Pinto. You tried to dismiss the Medical Examiner's findings in favor of "healing injuries", to suggest prosecution. And of all things, you found the vulgar comments of an apparently infamous character, "Shrek", to be of most credible. You wanted to know about opening an "investigation based upon his statement. Brilliant! If you are truly in the legal profession, you are a disgrace. A lot has happened, especially on the new thread, yet you remain conspicuously absent? Have you embarrassed your department?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »