Washington ( CNN ) -- The estate of the late actress Anna Nicole Smith has lost a Supreme Court appeal in a longstanding fight to secure a share of her deceased husband 's fortune . The 5-4 ruling Thursday was the latest chapter in a tedious legal soap opera , over the kind of evidence a separate bankruptcy court may hear when deciding various claims and counterclaims . State courts generally hear probate cases , while bankruptcy proceedings are confined to federal courts . The high court 's 38-page decision will now likely put an end to this particular legal dispute . J. Howard Marshall was married to the much younger Smith , who is named in court papers as Vickie Lynn Marshall , for 14 months before he died in 1995 . His will left nearly all assets and trust to his son from a previous marriage , E. Pierce Marshall , and Smith received virtually nothing . She later sued , claiming her elderly husband promised to give her more than $ 300 million . The separate estate of Smith , who died more than three years ago , has been fighting for years to secure a share of the deceased Texas oilman 's fortune . At issue now in the probate dispute was the kind of evidence a separate bankruptcy court may hear when deciding various claims and counterclaims . In the court 's very narrow ruling on a very complex issue , Chief Justice John Roberts concluded , `` The [ federal ] bankruptcy court below lacked the constitutional authority to enter final judgment on a state law counterclaim that is not resolved in the process of ruling on a creditor 's proof of claim . '' Translation : Smith 's estate lost . Court records shows she had already received about $ 7 million in cash and gifts during their brief union . In 2006 , the high court gave Smith a temporary victory when it allowed her to continue the legal fight , after earlier judicial setbacks . Smith 's appearance in the Supreme Court during the first oral arguments caused a minor media sensation , with cameras jockeying for position as she entered and left the building . Despite the colorful details contained in the legal briefs , the issue this time for the Supreme Court remained fairly pedestrian . The justices decided whether Smith 's estate received a proper hearing in federal courts , and whether state probate courts should be the proper venue for hearing such cases . The so-called `` probate exception '' normally keeps federal courts from hearing such disputes , but there is no law mandating the hands-off approach . The high court tried to sort out what is a `` core '' -- or essential -- issue in a bankruptcy proceeding . Smith had made several personal-injury allegations against Pierce Marshall -- who died in 2006 -- during the bitter bankruptcy hearings . Smith 's estate claims that it was a `` core '' proceeding the judge should have been allowed to sort out and decide . Smith , a onetime Playboy and jeans model , reality TV star and diet company spokeswoman , went to both state and federal courts to press her claims . The Supreme Court did not delve into matters raised in past legal proceedings : whether document tampering happened , whether Smith was kept from her husband 's bedside as he was dying , and how the money should be divided . In dissent , Justice Stephen Breyer said the majority opinion would only create confusion for those filing bankruptcy claims . A total of 1.6 million such claims were filed last year , an ever-increasing trend . `` A constitutionally required game of jurisdictional ping-pong between courts would lead to inefficiency , increased cost , delay , and needless additional suffering among those faced with bankruptcy , '' he said . He was supported by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Sonia Sotomayor , and Elena Kagan . The justices in their second hearing in the case in March did not mention either Smith or Pierce Marshall by name , or comment about the celebrity aspect of the dispute . The questions they posed at oral argument were on mundane issues tied to interpretation of bankruptcy law , a topic only some lawyers and judges would appreciate . Howard Marshall , a Yale-educated businessman , was 89 in 1994 when he married the then-26-year-old Texan . They had met a few years earlier at a strip club where she worked . Smith died of a drug overdose in 2007 , leaving behind a young daughter from a later relationship . That has created the unusual scenario of executors of competing estates fighting over still-frozen assets . State and federal courts have disagreed over the years on whether Smith should receive any part of the money . A U.S. bankruptcy judge initially awarded her $ 474 million , which later was reduced to about $ 90 million . A federal appeals court has since twice dismissed Smith 's case . A state probate court also dismissed her claims , saying Pierce Marshall was the sole heir . Leading the fight on behalf of Smith is Howard K. Stern , her attorney and onetime boyfriend . Stern was cleared of criminal charges by a judge earlier this year in Los Angeles . He had been accused conspiring to feed Smith 's drug addiction and using false names to obtain the drugs . He and two doctors charged as co-conspirators had denied wrongdoing . Pierce Marshall 's wife , Elaine , is the key party on the other side .
J. Howard Marshall left Smith virtually nothing . She had sued saying he had promised her $ 300 million . Smith died of a drug overdose in 2007 .