Lawyer for Giuliani-Linked Defendant Cites Executive Privilege Issue in Campaign Finance Case
Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebekah Donaleski said that the Department of Justice was aware of the concerns and already had a "filter team" in place but said "now is not the forum to litigate that issue."
October 23, 2019 at 01:11 PM
5 minute read
Executive privilege may block certain materials from discovery in a criminal campaign-finance case against two associates of Rudy Giuliani, said the lawyer for one of the two defendants at an arraignment in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Wednesday.
Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two foreign-born associates of Giuliani who have been indicted in a scheme to violate U.S. campaign-finance laws, pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy and falsifying records in Manhattan federal court.
In an arraignment before U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken of the Southern District of New York, Edward Brian MacMahon Jr., a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer who represents Parnas, said that some materials included in what is expected to be "voluminous" discovery may be covered by executive and attorney-client privilege, given Parnas' relationship to Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who is serving as a personal attorney to President Donald Trump.
MacMahon confirmed in court that Parnas had been using Giuliani as his lawyer and had also worked for Giuliani, who has come under fire for his dealings in Ukraine.
"There have already been issues of executive privilege raised," MacMahon said. "These are issues we need to be very sensitive to," he said.
Giuliani, in media reports, has dismissed suggestions of wrongdoing in the matter and has not been charged.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebekah Donaleski said that the Department of Justice was aware of the concerns and already had a "filter team" in place. As for executive privilege, she said, prosecutors would be open to further talks in private, but "now is not the forum to litigate that issue."
According to Donaleski, discovery materials would include returns from more than a dozen search warrants, including those for premises and social media accounts, as well as subpoena returns for more than 50 bank accounts.
Wednesday's arraignment marked the first time that Parnas and Fruman appeared in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York since they were arrested earlier this month at Dulles Airport with one-way tickets to board an international flight.
Prosecutors have alleged in a four-count indictment that both men had conspired to funnel foreign money to candidates for state and federal office in order to buy political influence in the United States.
According to the indictment, they made a series of illegal donations to a pro-Trump super PAC and a former Republican congressman, and then worked to conceal the scheme from candidates, campaigns and federal regulators by laundering money through bank accounts in the names of limited liability companies and through the use of straw donors.
Both men are charged with two counts of conspiracy, making false statements to the Federal Election Commission and falsifying records. Both were released on a $1 million bond and agreed to home detention and GPS monitoring.
Two other co-defendants, David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin, pleaded guilty last week to one count of conspiracy and are currently out on bond. The next court date for all four defendants was set for Dec. 2.
The indictment did not mention Giuliani or allege that he had any involvement in their alleged crimes. Congressional impeachment investigators, however, are scrutinizing his dealings in Ukraine, and prosecutors in the Southern District are reportedly probing his connections with Parnas and Fruman.
John Dowd, a former attorney for Trump, has agreed to represent Parnas and Fruman in the impeachment inquiry. In an Oct. 3 letter to the House committees overseeing the inquiry, Dowd said that Parnas and Fruman had "assisted Mr. Giuliani in his representation of President Trump" and that both men had also been "represented by Mr. Giuliani in connection with their personal business affairs."
"Thus, certain information you seek … is protected by the attorney-client, attorney work product and other privileges," Dowd said.
MacMahon said after the hearing that Dowd's letter had invoked executive privilege on Parnas' behalf, but declined to comment further. MacMahon has made no formal assertion of executive privilege himself but emphasized that it may be implicated in the case against his client.
Joseph Bondy, another attorney for Parnas, told reporters after the arraignment that the case against his client was a "smear campaign, driven by self-serving and misleading leaks apparently from the highest levels of our government."
Parnas added that "many false things have been said about me and my family" and that he would ultimately be vindicated.
Fruman, who is represented by New York-based Todd Blanche of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, did not address the media after Wednesday's arraignment.
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 AllFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readTrump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers for Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
SEC Under Trump 2.0 Likely to Take More 'Measured' Enforcement Approach, Observers Say
Trending 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