What can we say? Celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti just can’t stop winning for his clients:
JUST IN: Federal judge orders Stormy Daniels to pay President Donald Trump $293,052.33 in attorneys' fees in her defamation case against the president, which the judge tossed out. pic.twitter.com/MIfHSijuF9
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) December 11, 2018
Statement from Trump's lawyer, Charles Harder: "The court’s order, along with the court’s prior order dismissing Stormy Daniels’ defamation case against the President, together constitute a total victory for the President, and a total defeat for Stormy Daniels in this case." pic.twitter.com/fXMn7duBcB
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) December 11, 2018
The judge’s decision hasn’t stopped Avenatti from fighting for his client … on Twitter, at least:
Trump and his attorney's attempt to fool the public about the importance of the attorneys' fees in the defamation case, which are a fraction of what they owe my client in the main NDA case, is an absolute joke. People are smarter than that.https://t.co/oo3kkjVzPU via @YouTube
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) December 11, 2018
Charles Harder and Trump deserve each other because they are both dishonest. If Stormy has to pay $300k to Trump in the defamation case (which will never hold up on appeal) and Trump has to pay Stormy $1,500,000 in the NDA case (net $1,200,000 to Stormy), how is this a Trump win?
— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) December 11, 2018
How is this an Avenatti win?
Make no mistake: this is @MichaelAvenatti's fault, not Daniels'. It is the responsibility of counsel to advise their clients not to go ahead w/a suit obviously destined to boomerang back on them. Avenatti was quite arguably derelict in his duty. Others can speculate as to why. https://t.co/iMbiSPfT2q
— Jeff B. (@EsotericCD) December 11, 2018
When your best-case scenario is "sure I just lost my client $300,000, but when win the UPCOMING case (which we haven't won yet but trust me we will) we'll be ahead, all things considered!" you are engaging in some truly next-level spin. pic.twitter.com/TbX9YHbSjP
— Jeff B. (@EsotericCD) December 11, 2018
He's back in the running for #WorstLawyerEver
— Harold (@Nikk1066) December 11, 2018
How has he not been disbarred yet?
— The Packman (@adpackman) December 11, 2018
A simple go fund me account will take care of this
— DinjinSamadhi (@spandabelike) December 11, 2018
Probably. Almost certainly, actually.
Here’s Popehat’s take:
In a fairly substantial victory for Trump and his attorney Charles Harder, Judge Otero has awarded him 75% of what he requested in attorney fees against Stormy Daniels based on the anti-SLAPP motion victory in her bogus defamation case. /1
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
/2 Daniels, you'll recall, through the conspicuously-less-ubiquitous-now-than-previously Michael Avenatti, sued Trump over his tweet suggesting she made up being threatened in a parking lot. Rhetorical hyperbole and not a provable statement of fact, Judge Otero said correctly.
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
/4 So Otero granted Trump's anti-SLAPP motion. That was the right call. Trump, through Harder, demanded $389,403.11 in attorney fees, and then asked Otero to sanction ANOTHER $389,403.11, possibly just to get Avenatti to lose his shit in open court.
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
/5 In today's order, Judge Otero says (1) Trump's entitled to recover all his fees for this defamation case (probably right), (2) Charles Harder's hourly rates are reasonable (almost certainly right), and (3) he's giving the fees a 25% haircut because the hours are excessive.
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
/6 Judge Otero gave SUBSTANTIALLY more of the demanded fees than I would have guessed — I would have estimated 33% to 50% of what Trump demanded. I may just be dumb, or Judge Otero may feel the litigiousness of the matter (and the hours required) was primarily driven by Avenatti
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
/7 Anyway, that's unquestionably another big win for Trump in the litigation, and another big loss for Avenatti.
Avenatti has said he's confident he'll win the anti-SLAPP on appeal, but that confidence is badly misplaced.
/end
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
Can we just say we get a kick out of seeing Avenatti and anti-SLAPP together in the same tweet? Not that he’s been convicted of anything, but, you know, #BelieveWomen.
how can it fit the parameters of an anti-slapp motion when it is a President against an individual citizen. that is the opposite of the purpose of anti-slapp
— Barry Hammond (@hammondbarry667) December 11, 2018
Anti-SLAPP statutes are designed to prevent frivolous anti-speech litigation. Every court to consider it has rejected the argument "it only applies when it's big guys against little guys."
— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018
Avenatti should write that check.
— 3DPrintedVoter (@3DPrintedVoter) December 11, 2018
It would bounce.
— areyoukiddingme (@mhickey187) December 11, 2018
Related:
Basta! Celebrity lawyer, former 2020 hopeful Michael Avenatti in even more financial trouble https://t.co/DkdKvmFRUo
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) December 7, 2018
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.