Judge Admonishes Manafort but Takes No Further Action After Ukrainian Op-Ed
Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates, appeared before U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson Monday.
December 11, 2017 at 12:17 PM
10 minute read
Paul Manafort (Credit: Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM)
After prosecutors for the special counsel's office accused Paul Manafort of violating a court order by writing an op-ed last week, the judge handling the case offered only a stern warning for the former Trump campaign chairman in court Monday.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said in a status conference that the point of her November order, which barred parties and lawyers in the case from making statements to the media that could affect the case, was to ensure the merits of the case are debated in the courtroom and not the press.
“Mr. Manafort, that order applies to you and not just your lawyer,” Jackson said.
However, the judge vacated her earlier order to show cause as to why Manafort had not violated the order when he edited a op-ed published in a Ukrainian newspaper.
Manafort's lawyer, Kevin Downing, said his client has faced a “torrent of negative press” about his conduct and that he hoped the judge might offer more guidance about what Manafort is permitted to do. Jackson said that, if Downing filed a motion with specific questions about the order, she would Reply.
But Jackson added that there have also been disparaging articles in the media about the special counsel's team, led by Robert Mueller, as well as the court itself, and that neither of those parties has a way to set the record straight in those situations.
“I don't think that the answer is necessarily making public commentary at this time while this case is pending,” Jackson said.
Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates, pleaded not guilty to a 12-count indictment in October that included money laundering and failure to register as a foreign agent, and both remain on house arrest pending approval of bail packages with the government.
Jackson also addressed the bail issues in Monday's hearing. Though the government initially agreed to a roughly $11 million bail package proposed by Downing and Thomas Zehnle, Manafort's other lawyer, the special counsel lawyers backtracked that support after finding out about the op-ed.
Jackson asked Monday if the government lawyers agreed with Manafort now on whether the proposed package, which includes several of Manafort's properties, meets a value of more than $10 million.
Andrew Weissmann, of the special counsel's office, told Jackson that the lawyers were not completely sure they believed Manafort about the value of his homes, but that they were sure the homes had some value and that they could be sufficient for bail.
“The biggest issue we have is one of trust,” Weissmann said.
Jackson told Downing that she needed more information about Manafort's New York City condominium, as it appeared only a posting from the website Zillow was offered as proof of value. Downing said Zillow is “actually considered to be pretty accurate,” but that he would try to submit more formal documentation.
The judge also asked about Manafort's travel. The proposed bail package would allow travel to New York and Florida, where Manafort has homes and conducts business. Jackson said she was “not sure” about allowing domestic travel between the homes and asked Downing which home Manafort preferred. He replied that would be the home in Florida.
Weissmann said the government would suggest Manafort be required to provide a week's notice prior to traveling to New York, D.C. or Florida. Jackson did not indicate if she had a preference and said she would consider the parties' positions.
As for Gates, the judge inquired about the potential conflict of interest for one of his lawyers, Walter Mack, which the special counsel brought to light last month. Mack currently works as a defense lawyer in an unrelated wire fraud case in New York, where his client Steven Brown faces charges that he defrauded investors.
Prosecutors said the case could present a conflict because Gates and Brown have worked together, and Gates could potentially serve as a witness in Brown's case.
Mack wrote in court filings that neither Gates nor Brown is expected to be a part of the others' trial. Monday, Jackson asked Gates several questions under oath to ensure he understood that possible conflicts could arise if Mack was obligated to abide by attorney-client privilege for both Gates and Brown, since Mack would not be allowed to use anything learned from Brown in Gates' case and vice versa.
Gates said he was aware of the potential conflicts and still wanted to proceed with Mack as his lawyer.
The next status conference for Gates and Manafort will be Jan. 16 at 9:30 a.m.
Paul Manafort (Credit: Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM)
After prosecutors for the special counsel's office accused Paul Manafort of violating a court order by writing an op-ed last week, the judge handling the case offered only a stern warning for the former Trump campaign chairman in court Monday.
U.S. District Judge
“Mr. Manafort, that order applies to you and not just your lawyer,” Jackson said.
However, the judge vacated her earlier order to show cause as to why Manafort had not violated the order when he edited a op-ed published in a Ukrainian newspaper.
Manafort's lawyer, Kevin Downing, said his client has faced a “torrent of negative press” about his conduct and that he hoped the judge might offer more guidance about what Manafort is permitted to do. Jackson said that, if Downing filed a motion with specific questions about the order, she would Reply.
But Jackson added that there have also been disparaging articles in the media about the special counsel's team, led by Robert Mueller, as well as the court itself, and that neither of those parties has a way to set the record straight in those situations.
“I don't think that the answer is necessarily making public commentary at this time while this case is pending,” Jackson said.
Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates, pleaded not guilty to a 12-count indictment in October that included money laundering and failure to register as a foreign agent, and both remain on house arrest pending approval of bail packages with the government.
Jackson also addressed the bail issues in Monday's hearing. Though the government initially agreed to a roughly $11 million bail package proposed by Downing and Thomas Zehnle, Manafort's other lawyer, the special counsel lawyers backtracked that support after finding out about the op-ed.
Jackson asked Monday if the government lawyers agreed with Manafort now on whether the proposed package, which includes several of Manafort's properties, meets a value of more than $10 million.
Andrew Weissmann, of the special counsel's office, told Jackson that the lawyers were not completely sure they believed Manafort about the value of his homes, but that they were sure the homes had some value and that they could be sufficient for bail.
“The biggest issue we have is one of trust,” Weissmann said.
Jackson told Downing that she needed more information about Manafort's
The judge also asked about Manafort's travel. The proposed bail package would allow travel to
Weissmann said the government would suggest Manafort be required to provide a week's notice prior to traveling to
As for Gates, the judge inquired about the potential conflict of interest for one of his lawyers, Walter Mack, which the special counsel brought to light last month. Mack currently works as a defense lawyer in an unrelated wire fraud case in
Prosecutors said the case could present a conflict because Gates and Brown have worked together, and Gates could potentially serve as a witness in Brown's case.
Mack wrote in court filings that neither Gates nor Brown is expected to be a part of the others' trial. Monday, Jackson asked Gates several questions under oath to ensure he understood that possible conflicts could arise if Mack was obligated to abide by attorney-client privilege for both Gates and Brown, since Mack would not be allowed to use anything learned from Brown in Gates' case and vice versa.
Gates said he was aware of the potential conflicts and still wanted to proceed with Mack as his lawyer.
The next status conference for Gates and Manafort will be Jan. 16 at 9:30 a.m.
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'Absurd Costs'?: Visa Faces Antitrust Class-Action Surge Following DOJ Complaint
3 minute read'Systemic and Pervasive'?: DiCello Levitt Alleges WWE Child Sexual Abuse Scandal
3 minute readThe 2024 NLJ Awards: Professional Excellence—Appellate Hot List
4th Circuit Revives Workplace Retaliation Lawsuit Against Biden's HHS Secretary
3 minute readTrending Stories
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