Avenatti Doesn’t Want Child Support Claim Used in Nike Trial

(Bloomberg) -- Celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti wants a judge to bar the U.S. from presenting his financial condition, including allegations he missed child support payments, as evidence for a possible motive in his extortion trial.

Avenatti, who gained a national profile after suing President Donald Trump on behalf of adult-film star Stormy Daniels, is set to go on trial later this month on charges that he tried to extort millions of dollars from Nike Inc. while representing an elite youth basketball coach.

Avenatti disputes the government’s claims that he was more than $15 million in debt and behind on child and spousal support. He fears that if the U.S. makes such claims to jurors it would unfairly bias them against him, his lawyer said in a court filing Friday in Manhattan federal court.

“Even if Mr. Avenatti was in arrears, which he denies, this type of evidence is regularly held inadmissible,” his lawyer said.

Avenatti made a similar argument recently to challenge the government’s plan to show jurors evidence of his debt from spending on items like a luxury home or Ferrari, as well as $5 million he owed another lawyer.

Federal prosecutors say Avenatti, 48, tried to extort $25 million from Beaverton, Oregon-based Nike while representing a youth basketball coach, Gary Franklin, who claimed to have information about improper payments to athletes by the company. Nike’s lawyers in New York wore wires to obtain evidence against Avenatti, who was arrested after a meeting with them.

Avenatti demanded the payment in exchange for canceling a potentially damaging press conference about the company, according to prosecutors.

Prosecutors say evidence of his large debt is necessary to show the jury his motive for trying to extort money from Nike. Avenatti has argued the case against him is politically motivated.

“Mr. Avenatti -- a well-known plaintiff’s lawyer in private practice -- was fully expecting payment in connection with a settlement of coach Franklin’s claim,” according to the filing. “But why he hoped to get paid -- whether to pay off debts, travel the world, or save up for a rainy day -- logically makes no difference at all.“

The case is U.S. v. Avenatti, 19-cr-00373, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

To contact the reporter on this story: Erik Larson in New York at elarson4@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at dglovin@bloomberg.net, Joe Schneider, Anthony Lin

©2020 Bloomberg L.P.