Prosecutors Decline to Take Stance on Avenatti's Bid to Appear in Cohen Raid Litigation
In a letter filed late Monday, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office said it "takes no position" in the battle raging between Stormy Daniels' attorney and counsel for the president's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.
May 21, 2018 at 06:56 PM
3 minute read
Michael Avenatti. (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan),
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York said late Monday that it “takes no position” in the hotly contested pro hac vice request by attorney Michael Avenatti to appear before U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood on behalf of his client, adult film performer Stephanie Clifford, who goes by the stage name Stormy Daniels.
The government was directed by Wood earlier in the day to alert the court whether it would join attorneys for Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, in opposing Avenatti's application.
In staying out of the fray, federal prosecutors were seen by observers as steering clear of a bitter back-and-forth between an interested, but outside, third party, and the potential target of future criminal prosecution by the office.
“Safe move,” Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler partner Harry Sandick, himself a former federal prosecutor in the office, said about the decision in a post on Twitter.
In a separate Twitter post, Avenatti himself characterized the situation as “the government is NOT opposing my application to be admitted pro hac vice.”
“I remain confident that Mr. Cohen's attempts to exclude me from the case will fail for the reasons we provided,” he said. He declined to elaborate beyond his post in a follow-up email.
Cohen's attorney, McDermott Will & Emery partner Stephen Ryan, did not respond to a request for comment. He has, however, in prior filings argued that Avenatti's disparaging public statements about Cohen, as well as his release of banking information that showed millions deposited shortly after Trump's victory in 2016 from foreign and domestic companies into a bank account Cohen previously used to pay Avenatti's client $130,000 as part of a now-contested hush agreement, amounted to Avenatti creating a “carnival atmosphere” around Cohen and the current legal proceeding in Manhattan.
While the government Monday stated it took no position on Avenatti's pro hac vice application, it did ask the court to continue to hold Clifford's motion to intervene in the matter before Wood in abeyance until June. The government's letter noted the request was made with the consent of Avenatti.
Wood is overseeing a process of reviewing material seized by federal agents from Cohen's offices and home as part of a search warrant in April. Cohen raised concerns about material in the government's possession that could be subject to attorney-client privilege. Former Southern District judge and current Bracewell partner Barbara Jones was named by Wood as a special master to handle the initial review.
One of the intervenors already allowed into the matter has so far declined to weigh in on Avenatti's request. Spears & Imes partner Joanna Hendon, counsel for Trump in the matter before Wood, has not filed papers on the matter. She did not respond to a request for comment Monday on the battle over Avenatti's pro hac vice application.
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 AllPatent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
Trade Fixtures in New York Eminent Domain Cases—What Qualifies and How Are They Valued?
10 minute readAttorneys ‘On the Move’: Morrison Cohen Adds White Collar Partner; Corporate/Securities Partner Joins Olshan
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Stock Trading App Robinhood Hit With Privacy Class Action 1 Month After Alleged Data Breach
- 2NY High Court Returns Fired Priest's Discrimination Claim to State Agency
- 3Digging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
- 4Reminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
- 5Consumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
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