Michael Avenatti launched a courtroom defense that attempts to cast his activities with client settlement money as routine and common, describing the case against him as being "about math."

"This case is about how you calculate what a client is due after their settlement is received," Avenatti told Central District of California jurors in a 30-minute opening statement that focused on the civil litigation tactics of his now-bankrupt law firm, Eagan Avenatti. His basic defense is that he spent huge amounts of money helping his clients before he secured their settlements, and the money he kept was to cover those expenses.

"We represented the Davids v. the Goliaths. We did it across the country, and the evidence will show we were blessed to do it very well," said Avenatti, who took over his defense Tuesday in a surprise move. "We gave people who had no chance a fighting chance. We did it by doing exactly what I'm doing right now, but in a civil context. In civil cases."

"We took money out of our own pocket to assist them with their lives and with their cases," Avenatti said of his clients. "The evidence will show that the government does not want to focus on any of those points."

Expected to last at least three weeks, the trial is the second in 18 months for Avenatti, who was sentenced in New York to 30 months in prison for felony convictions related to an extortion plot against Nike. The case being tried now before U.S. District Judge James V. Selna of the Central District of California in Santa Ana carries much more time in prison, and involves 10 wire fraud counts related to alleged stolen client settlements.

Before Avenatti addressed the jury Wednesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Brett Sagel used his 35-minute opening to describe to the jury how Avenatti allegedly lied and stole from four clients, beginning with Geoff Johnson, a man who wanted to buy a handicap-accessible home with a $4 million settlement from Los Angeles County that Avenatti allegedly stole instead.

Sagel alleged Avenatti spent all the settlement money, then used other funds to give Johnson small payments, while lying about the status of the settlement and forging his signature. Another of the ex-clients is well-known YouTube makeup artist Michelle Phan. Avenatti allegedly spent their money on personal expenses, including a Honda jet, Sagel told jurors.

"Each of their cases were different, but all of them trusted Michael Avenatti," Sagel claimed.

Lawyers on the Stand

Sagel's co-counsel Alexander Wyman questioned the first witness, Patrick McNicholas, a plaintiffs lawyer with McNicholas & McNicholas in Los Angeles, about his work with Avenatti on Johnson's case, before Avenatti launched into a cross examination that tried to align McNicholas' activities with his own.

Avenatti's questions were rooted in what he told jurors in his opening: His firm bore huge risks by taking cases on contingency, and it spent huge sums of money on clients, including Johnson, that he as an attorney had every right to recoup once cash arrived. He also touched on a strict standard by which he told the jury they must abide: Prosecutors must prove every amount in each of the 10 wire fraud counts "to the dollar."

"Close is not good enough. To the dollar, ladies and gentlemen," Avenatti said.

With that in mind, Avenatti questioned McNicholas about $350,000 McNicholas received in attorney fees, and money he recovered for costs associated with his work on the case.

Given the fact that McNicholas received that money, "Isn't it true that Michael Avenatti did not steal the entire $4 million Johnson settlement check?" Avenatti asked.

"As defined, I would agree with that," McNicholas answered.

On re-direct, Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander Wyman established that McNicholas doesn't actually know the true source of the money he received. Wyman also addressed Avenatti's inference in his cross that Johnson's settlement was a matter of public record, and thus not concealed from him. 

"Do you typically have your clients learn about their settlements through public filings?" Wyman asked.

Avenatti objected as argumentative, but Selna overruled.

"No," McNicholas answered.

Wyman also asked McNicholas if he expected Johnson to receive "zero dollars" after all attorney fees and costs were paid.

"Your expectation was that Mr. Johnson would get something from the settlement, correct?" Wyman asked.

"Absolutely, yes," McNicholas answered.

The second witness was Thomas Hurrell, a civil defense lawyer at Hurrell Cantrall in Los Angeles, who represented Los Angeles County in Johnson's lawsuit.

Prosecutors say Avenatti never told Johnson about the settlement, and instead forged his signature on a document he gave to Hurrell. But Hurrell told jurors he didn't know whether the signature on the document was truly Johnson's.

In cross examination, Avenatti asked if Hurrell knows how much money Johnson was owed, and Hurrell said that he didn't.

"Sir, as you sit there today, do you have any idea one way or the other whether I did anything unethical or illegal in connection with Mr. Johnson's settlement?" Avenatti asked.

"I don't have any knowledge of that," Hurrell answered.

Testimony continues Thursday.