ShareThis Page
Political Headlines

Lawyers seek to block Stormy Daniels' lawyer from Cohen case

| Friday, May 18, 2018, 8:21 p.m.
In this Thursday, May 10, 2018 file photo, Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniel's attorney, is interviewed on the Cheddar network in New York. Attorneys for President Trump’s personal lawyer say Avenatti, a lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels has created a “carnival atmosphere” and should be kept from a New York court.
In this Thursday, May 10, 2018 file photo, Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniel's attorney, is interviewed on the Cheddar network in New York. Attorneys for President Trump’s personal lawyer say Avenatti, a lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels has created a “carnival atmosphere” and should be kept from a New York court.

NEW YORK — Attorneys for President Trump's personal lawyer said in court papers Friday that a lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels has created a “carnival atmosphere” and should be kept from a New York court.

Michael Cohen's attorneys made their arguments in a filing in Manhattan federal court to a judge overseeing the process through which some materials seized April 9 in FBI raids on Cohen's home and office will be kept from criminal prosecutors to protect attorney-client privilege.

To ensure the integrity of the process, Judge Kimba Wood last month appointed a former federal judge, Barbara Jones, to resolve conflicts over what is subject to the privilege.

Prosecutors have said the raids resulted from an investigation into possible fraud involving Cohen's business interests. No charges have been filed.

Cohen's attorneys said letting California lawyer Michael Avenatti join the legal fight over the privilege issue would “be detrimental to the careful review procedure that is currently being overseen by the special master.”

The attorneys wrote that Avenatti has focused on “smearing” Cohen publicly and has made inaccurate statements. They also said Avenatti has released “factually accurate information” about Cohen's banking transactions and asked Wood to inquire how he got it.

“This should be extremely troubling to the court,” they said. “Mr. Avenatti's deliberate public dissemination of confidential nonpublic information speaks to his character and lack of fitness to appear before this court — as well as his craving to create a ‘carnival atmosphere' in this case.”

Earlier this week, Avenatti filed papers to be admitted into the case to protect the interests of Daniels.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, says she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and was paid to keep quiet as part of a nondisclosure agreement she signed days before the 2016 presidential election. She has sought to invalidate that agreement.

Cohen has admitted arranging a $130,000 payment to quiet the porn star's claims she had an affair with Trump.

Avenatti labeled the filing by Cohen's lawyers “without merit and frivolous.”

“It speaks volumes that they so desperately want me excluded,” he added.

Wood has scheduled a hearing for next week to be updated on where things stand on the processing of raid materials.

Trump repeatedly denied an affair with Daniels and told reporters on Air Force One he hadn't known about a settlement with her. Trump later acknowledged on Twitter he repaid Cohen but said the money “had nothing to do” with his Republican presidential campaign.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me