FBI Raids the Offices of Trump's Personal Attorney, Michael Cohen
The raid was confirmed by Cohen's attorney, McDermott Will & Emery partner Stephen Ryan.
April 09, 2018 at 04:56 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
In this Sept. 19, 2017 file photo President Donald Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen appears in front of members of the media after a closed-door meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill, in Washington. Photo Credit: AP/Andrew Harnik
The FBI raided the offices of President Donald Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, on Monday, according to a statement by Cohen's own attorney, McDermott Will & Emery partner Stephen Ryan.
According to the statement posted on the firm's website, the FBI seized privileged communications between Cohen and “his clients” on behalf of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, Ryan said. The move was taken, in part, through a referral by the Office of Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, according to Ryan.
According to Ryan, the move by the office of U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman was “completely inappropriate and unnecessary.”
“It resulted in the unnecessary seizure of protected attorney-client communications between a lawyer and his clients,” Ryan said. “These government tactics are also wrong because Mr. Cohen has cooperated completely with all government entities, including providing thousands of non-privileged documents to the Congress and sitting for depositions under oath.”
Cohen has long served as Trump's personal lawyer ahead of his election as president in 2016. Most recently, Cohen has found himself at the center of controversy over a $130,000 payment he said he made on his own to adult film actress Stephanie Clifford, who goes by Stormy Daniels, just before the election.
A spokesman for the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office declined to comment.
An attempt to reach Cohen by phone and email was unsuccessful. In a statement, Squire Patton Boggs said Monday that it had ended its formal working relationship with Cohen following the raid.
Berman was appointed by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in January, pending a nomination by Trump for confirmation by the U.S. Senate. That nomination has yet to be made. U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York has vowed to block Berman's nomination over reports Trump personally interviewed Berman, then a shareholder at Greenberg Traurig, ahead of his appointment.
The privileged communications seized by prosecutors will require a special process for federal agents and prosecutors to be able to use them, according to former prosecutors with experience handling communications usually protected by attorney-client privilege.
A firewall is erected between the “dirty” side of the investigation—agents and prosecutors who conduct a filter review of the material that may include information the government should not be privy to. Any communications authorities want to be able to use requires the petitioning of a court for a crime fraud exception. The communications would have to show the attorney was perpetuating or facilitating a criminal act.
Once the judge involved in the case grants the petition by the “dirty” side of the investigation, the relevant information that's been cleared is handed off to the “clean” side who proceed with the investigation.
This would not be the first time federal investigators sought a crime fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege. Recently, U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the District of Columbia granted the government's request to compel an attorney connected to Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort to testify before a grand jury in that prosecution.
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 AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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