After shocking NY arrest, Avenatti faces court in California
Law Journals
A week after Michael Avenatti’s shocking arrest in New York, the attorney famous for representing porn star Stormy Daniels in legal battles against President Donald Trump will be back in federal court Monday to face fraud charges in California.
The brash lawyer faces a hearing in the Orange County city of Santa Ana on charges he fraudulently obtained $4 million in bank loans and pocketed $1.6 million that belonged to a client. Avenatti has long faced allegations from a former client and a former partner that he was hiding money to avoid paying what he owed.
Now, federal authorities are adding their voices to that chorus, with the specter of a long prison sentence that could be the downfall of a man who once considered challenging Trump in his re-election bid.
Avenatti, 48, is charged with wire and bank fraud. He was arrested last week in New York and released on $300,000 bail on unrelated extortion charges. He has said he expects to be exonerated.
Federal prosecutors in New York allege that Avenatti tried to shake down Nike for millions of dollars so he wouldn’t reveal allegations the apparel company paid off high school basketball players. He has denied the charge to reporters and began tweeting what he called evidence of the scandal the day after he was arrested.
In California, federal prosecutors said Avenatti filed bogus tax returns to fraudulently secure $4 million in loans from a Mississippi bank and embezzled a client’s settlement funds.
The U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles said Monday’s hearing would likely focus on setting future court dates.
Avenatti is known for his outspoken challenge of Trump and lavish lifestyle, including renting a $100,000-a-month home in upscale Newport Beach. He represented Daniels in her claim that Trump paid her to keep quiet about their alleged affair ahead of the 2016 election.
Avenatti’s former law firm went through bankruptcy proceedings and was ordered to pay $10 million to a former partner, who is still seeking to collect the money.
Related listings
-
N Carolina governor signs law keeping Court of Appeals at 15
Law Journals 03/04/2019North Carolina's intermediate-level appeals court will stay at 15 judges as Gov. Roy Cooper signed legislation that repeals a 2017 law that would have reduced the seats to 12 over time.Cooper announced Thursday that he had signed the law , which Repu...
-
High court deciding fate of cross-shaped Maryland memorial
Law Journals 02/24/2019The Supreme Court this week is hearing a case challenging the location of a nearly 100-year-old, cross-shaped Maryland war memorial.Three area residents and the District of Columbia-based American Humanist Association argue the cross' location on pub...
-
High court rules for retired US marshal in W.Va. tax dispute
Law Journals 02/22/2019The Supreme Court said Wednesday that the state of West Virginia unlawfully discriminated against a retired U.S. marshal when it excluded him from a more generous tax break given to onetime state law enforcement officers.The court ruled unanimously f...
USCIS to Begin Accepting Applications under the International Entrepreneur Rule
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it is taking steps to implement the International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), in accordance with a recent court decision.
Although the IER was published during the previous administration with an effective date of July 17, 2017, it did not take effect because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a final rule on July 11, 2017, delaying the IER’s effective date until March 14, 2018. This delay rule was meant to give USCIS time to review the IER and, if necessary, to issue a rule proposing to remove the IER program regulations.
However, a Dec. 1, 2017, ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in National Venture Capital Association v. Duke vacated USCIS’ final rule to delay the effective date. The Dec. 1, 2017, court decision is a result of litigation filed in district court on Sept. 19, 2017, which challenged the delay rule.