Nike In-House Lawyer Met With Avenatti Over Alleged Extortion Demands—Then Notified Law Enforcement
Nike's legal team notified law enforcement over alleged extortion attempts from Michael Avenatti. Lawyers weighed in on when a plaintiffs attorney's letter becomes extortion and what to do next.
March 25, 2019 at 06:03 PM
3 minute read
Attorney Michael Avenatti is being charged with four extortion-related counts in the Southern District of New York over alleged attempts to blackmail Nike Inc. for millions in meetings with the company's inside and outside counsel.
In a complaint released Monday, Federal Bureau of Investigation special agent Christopher Harper claimed Avenatti met with an in-house Nike lawyer and two outside counsel representatives on March 19. He allegedly told the lawyers a client he represented knew of concealed Nike payments to top-performing high school athletes.
Avenatti made a series of threats to go public with the information and harm Nike's reputation, eventually asking for more than $20 million to stay silent. But Nike didn't agree to the alleged extortion attempts. Instead, it contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and began passing along incriminating texts and phone recordings.
“Nike will not be extorted or hide information that is relevant to a government investigation. Nike has been cooperating with the government's investigation into NCAA basketball for over a year,” a company representative said in an email Monday. “When Nike became aware of this matter, Nike immediately reported it to federal prosecutors. When Mr. Avenatti attempted to extort Nike over this matter, Nike with the assistance of outside counsel at Boies Schiller Flexner, aided the investigation.”
The representative added Nike “believes in ethical and fair play, both in business and sports, and will continue to assist the prosecutors.”
David Lewis, a legal ethics lawyer at David Lewis Law in New York, said in-house counsel should consider reporting obligations and what's best for the company when faced with a situation such as Nike's. Before approaching law enforcement, in-house and outside counsel should consult with other company leaders.
“It appears that here it was clear that [Nike] felt they were the victim of a crime and so it would seem to be extremely prudent to take the actions that they took,” Lewis said.
He and Max Kennerly, a founding attorney at Kennerly Loutey, said it's common for in-house counsel to receive letters from plaintiffs lawyers seeking payment for clients. In the vast majority of cases, Kennerly said that's not extortion.
But the lawyers said Avenatti's alleged requests for his own, separate multimillion-dollar payment and his demand for a role as Nike's internal investigator raised extortion concerns.
“The big red flag here is … there's a negotiation going on here with a threat that has nothing to do with the plaintiff,” Kennerly said. “I hope this isn't misread as, 'If I get a demand I don't like, I will take this to prosecutors.'”
Read the full SDNY complaint here:
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'You Can’t Do a First Draft of Common Sense': Microsoft GC Jon Palmer Talks AI, Litigation, and Leadership
'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readHow Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250