If True, Stormy’s Claim About Avenatti is Kind of a Big Deal (YNOT)

Read the full article by Gene Zorkin at YNOT.com

LOS ANGELES – In a statement published by the Daily Beast on Wednesday, Stormy Daniels said her attorney Michael Avenatti “filed a defamation case against Donald Trump against my wishes.”

Given that the ill-considered defamation lawsuit has since been subject to a successful anti-SLAPP motion by Trump’s attorneys, resulting in the awarding of attorney’s fees to Trump by the judge hearing the case, one can certainly understand why Stormy would be unhappy about the outcome of the lawsuit. If it’s true she objected to the idea of filing the claims in advance of Avenatti doing so – and, more to the point, if a court were to accept as true her allegation to that effect – the consequences for Avenatti could be significant.

“An attorney can only file a lawsuit at the client’s direction,” attorney Larry Walters told YNOT. “Filing suit without the client’s consent is a serious matter, which could lead to potential malpractice claims and bar discipline.”

At this point, based on what is publicly known, it’s also very hard to say what Stormy means when she says Avenatti filed the lawsuit against her wishes. Did Stormy object to the idea of filing in a way which is independently confirmable? Did she initially object to filing, then get talked into it by Avenatti?

Even some of Avenatti’s harshest critics in the legal community, like attorney Marc Randazza (who, in comments to YNOT earlier this month called Avenatti a “total moron” and “intellectual lightweight”) have expressed doubt that Avenatti would be so foolish as to file a lawsuit over the explicit objection of his client. 

Gene Zorkin has been covering legal and political issues for various adult publications (and under a variety of different pen names) since 2002.