Posted in Civil Litigation, Contract
Justice? Or publicity? Stormy Daniels wanted to rescind the confidential agreement she signed. Trump/Cohn agreed to rescind the confidentiality agreement, and also agreed not to pursue Stormy Daniels for her alleged breach under the confidential agreement. What else is there to litigate?
If you have heard about Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, Donald Trump, Michael Cohen and $130,000, you know the story. Michael Avenatti on behalf of Stormy Daniels filed a lawsuit against Donald J. Trump and Michael Cohn to have the court declare the confidentiality agreement that Stormy Daniels agreed to in exchange for $130,000, is void so that she can continue to talk about the alleged affair that she had with Donald Trump.
Before the court adjudicates the case, Stormy Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti, went on the media blitz, trash-talking many things about Donald J. Trump. Avenatti almost seemed like the answer of bullish Trump that most Americans find unpresidential. For those, it looks like Michael Avenatti, is the answer to Donald Trump, even though it is patently clear that he is using the lawsuit as a vehicle for publicity.
In the beginning, Trump and Cohen, fought hard to enforce the settlement agreement. Later, their strategy took a 180-degree turn. Trump and Cohen, during the course of the litigation, agreed to rescind the confidential agreement as if it was never signed and agreed not to pursue any claims against Stormy Daniels for alleged breaching of the confidentiality agreement. Donald Trump, himself, even agreed that he would not deny the existence of the confidentiality agreement. On that basis, Tump and Cohen asked Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti to dismiss the case. Well, “Stormy Avenetti” never responded to the request.
Hence, on October 8, 2018, Trump and Cohen’s side of the camp, filed a motion to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. “Stormy Avenatti” opposed the defendant’s request for the case to be dismissed. Not only Stormy Avenatti filed the opposition, but Michael Avenatti also filed a supplement with his declaration opposing the case to be dismissed. He even attached two exhibits comprised of Robert Mueller’s Sentence Memorandum, and the transcript during Michael Cohen’s sentencing hearing. I don’t know how these two documents would support the fact that there are no longer issues to be resolved in the case. The Exhibits are about 90 pages long, and there must be something in there that will show support — sarcastically speaking.
January 22, 2019, Judge Otero presided over the hearing. The judge indicated that he is strongly inclined to dismiss the case even though “Stormy Avenatti” would like to keep it alive. “We are here for justice,” responded by Michael Avenatti during the hearing after Judge Otero commented.
In business, we occasionally will run into the situation that people file a lawsuit for a personal reason instead of seeking to cause damage. It is often best to have a game plan in advance to prevent such lawsuits and resolve the dispute before it passes the point of no return.
If you are facing a business dispute with your partners, shareholders, customers or suppliers, contact our office to find out your options. Our focus is to resolve the dispute before it passes the point of no return, however, if we need to go to court, we will make sure that we win the battle before we begin. Call our office today to find out your options.
