Avenatti's Extortion Trial Delayed Following Arrest in California
Avenatti's defense lawyers said Wednesday that the problems created by their client's arrest extended "far beyond" the trial's start date, and hinted he may have to file papers with the court as an indigent person.
January 15, 2020 at 07:00 PM
5 minute read
A Manhattan federal judge on Wednesday postponed the start of Michael Avenatti's extortion trial next week, after a judge in California ordered that he be held without bond amid new allegations of fraud and money laundering.
According to court papers, the U.S. Marshals Service was expected to transport Avenatti to New York later this week. However, his arrest and jailing in Los Angeles injected his extortion case with a fresh sense of confusion on the eve of a planned Jan. 21 trial, and kicked off a flurry of filings throughout the day as prosecutors scrambled to assess the impact.
U.S. District Judge Paul G. Gardephe of the Southern District of New York said earlier in the day that the developments had thrown the case into a state of "chaos" and threatened Avenatti's ability to communicate with counsel on a number of outstanding issues.
"It's clear that the trial date for Tuesday needs to be adjourned," he said on a conference call late Wednesday afternoon.
Gardephe said he wanted the trial to begin no later than Jan. 27, and ordered attorneys to meet again Friday morning in Manhattan.
Avenatti maintains that he is innocent and has pleaded not guilty in both cases.
Prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of California detailed a series of financial crimes they said he committed while awaiting a May trial on accusations that he embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from his clients.
In court documents unsealed Wednesday, prosecutors there alleged that he had defrauded his creditors and took elaborate steps to hide $1 million he had received following his arrest last year by moving funds through various bank accounts and using cashier's checks to spend it. In total, Avenatti owed more than $10 million at the time, a tally that included several outstanding court judgments, prosecutors said.
He was arrested Tuesday night while attending a disciplinary proceeding at a Los Angeles courthouse.
"Since at least May 2019, defendant has brazenly attempted to defraud and conceal his assets from these creditors," prosecutors wrote in the filings.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Podolsky said Wednesday that the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office was not told about the arrest warrant ahead of time, but prosecutors were working with the Marshals Service to move Avenatti to New York as quickly as possible.
"This office had no role in investigating these allegations," Podolsky said Wednesday morning. "We frankly weren't aware … until after an arrest was made."
Avenatti's defense lawyers said Wednesday that the problems created by their client's arrest extended "far beyond" the trial's start date. It was not clear based on the allegations in California, defense attorney Jose Quinon said, whether Avenatti had any money to pay their expert and to fund technical assistance and witness travel.
Quinon said he needed time to discuss resources with Avenatti, but raised the possibility of indigency proceedings in New York, if no funds were available.
"The rug has been pulled from under us because this was absolutely, totally unexpected," Quinon said.
"On the eve of trial, we're just left naked out in the street," he said.
Avenatti is accused in New York of extortion, conspiracy and honest services wire fraud related to his representation of Gary Franklin, a California-based youth basketball coach who claimed to have damaging information about alleged payments Nike made to the families of college basketball recruits.
Nike has not been charged with any crimes and denies any wrongdoing.
According to prosecutors, Avenatti told Nike he would keep the alleged recruiting violations quiet, so long as the company agreed to settle his client's claims and pay Avenatti between $15 million and $25 million to head an internal investigation. Crucially, prosecutors said that Avenatti never told Franklin about Nike's offers to resolve the dispute without paying Avenatti or retaining him for an internal probe.
Avenatti rose to national prominence for his representation of Stormy Daniels, an adult film star who said she had an extramarital affair with President Donald Trump. Trump has denied those allegations.
An outspoken critic of Trump, he briefly flirted with a presidential run before becoming mired in a series of high-profile prosecutions.
In addition to the two cases in California and New York, Avenatti is also accused in Manhattan of skimming money on a book deal that was being paid to Daniels. Trial in that case is scheduled to begin in April.
Gardephe on multiple occasions Wednesday expressed frustration with the decision to arrest Avenatti so close to trial, and implored attorneys on both sides to work out their issues ahead of Friday's scheduled conference.
"It remains entirely unclear to me why it was decided to arrest Mr. Avenatti a week before the trial, based primarily on allegations that go back to last summer," the judge said during the afternoon call.
"That's created enormous disruption, so unless the parties cooperate constructively, I have no idea when this case gets tried," he said.
Gardephe is still expected to rule on a number of substantive pretrial motions, but he said those decisions must wait until Avenatti is moved to New York and has a chance to meet with counsel.
Read More:
Michael Avenatti, 1 Week Before NY Trial, Is Arrested for Bail Violations in LA
Judge Denies Michael Avenatti's Motion to Dismiss Third Count of Nike Extortion Indictment
Avenatti Seeks to Exclude Evidence of Personal Finances From Nike Extortion Trial
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
© 2025 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 AllPrivate Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute readSkadden and Steptoe, Defending Amex GBT, Blasts Biden DOJ's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Merger Proposal
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1St. Jude Labs Sued for $14.3M for Allegedly Falling Short of Purchase Expectations
- 2'Ridiculously Busy': Several Law Firms Position Themselves as Go-To Experts on Trump’s Executive Orders
- 3States Reach New $7.4B Opioid Deal With Purdue After SCOTUS Ruling
- 4$975,000 Settlement Reached After Fall on Sidewalk
- 5'Where Were the Lawyers?' Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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