Court OK's Partial Disclosure of Michael Cohen Warrant Information
U.S. District Judge William Pauley III ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on common law grounds, ordering Manhattan prosecutors to provide redacted documents for the court's review by Feb. 28.
February 07, 2019 at 04:29 PM
3 minute read
The public is soon likely to see details of what led federal investigators to seek, receive and execute search warrants against the home and offices of Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, last April.
U.S. District Judge William Pauley III of the Southern District of New York ruled partially in favor of a host of news organizations seeking the disclosure of the search warrants. Ruling on common law grounds, Pauley ordered the government to provide a partially redacted version of the documents to the court by Feb. 28 for his review before likely placing them on the public docket.
Following Cohen's guilty plea in August to tax evasion and campaign finance violations, a host of news organizations—including The New York Times, the Associated Press, and CNN—filed applications to have documents connected to the April 9, 2018 searches unsealed.
The government opposed unsealing the documents, citing the threat doing so would pose to an ongoing investigation and the prejudice uncharged third parties could face. Cohen did submit papers in the matter.
Pauley made clear he heard the government's concerns. A “wholesale disclosure” at this point would “reveal the scope and direction of the Government's ongoing investigation” into people and organizations related to Cohen's campaign finance plea.
The government's charges stemmed from efforts by Cohen and Trump, then the Republican presidential nominee, to pay off two women who claimed to have extramarital affairs with Trump, ahead of the November election. As detailed in court papers and news reports, numerous individuals—including the President himself, the Trump Organization, and the publisher of the National Enquirer—were connected to the actions Cohen pleaded guilty to.
Agreeing that the government had shown good cause for concern over its ongoing efforts in this category, Pauley ordered that the warrant material related to Cohen's campaign finance charges be redacted in its entirety. The same was not the case for the tax evasion charges that stemmed from Cohen's taxi medallion dealings, and attempts to improperly secure loans from financial institutions. While some information related to third parties would be allowed to be redacted by the government, Pauley ordered that much of it be released.
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York declined to comment on Pauley's order.
While the news organizations could claim a degree of victory in Pauley's order, a good portion of the 30-page decision by the judge went into dismantling arguments made by the news groups for disclosure of the warrants on First Amendment right-to-access grounds. While he noted that while the Second Circuit allows for a common law analysis to trump a constitutional one, Pauley went ahead in describing how other circuits have generally ruled against broad First Amendment grounds for unsealing. He we went on to dismiss the plaintiffs' constitutional arguments, finding “neither experience nor logic points to a First Amendment right to access.
The news organizations are represented by Davis Wright Tremaine partner Rachel Strom. She did not respond to a request for comment.
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'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readDapper Labs $4M Settlement, $1.3M in Attorney Fees Reveal NFT Settlement Trend
4 minute readSyracuse Courtroom Dedicated to Trailblazing City Court Judge Langston McKinney
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Meet the Lawyers on Kamala Harris' Transition Team
- 5Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
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