Cohen files motion to have Daniels case decided in private arbitraton, Avenatti responds

[Miles Archer]

Michael Avenatti
‏@MichaelAvenatti

We will vigorously oppose the just-filed motion by DJT and MC to have this case decided in a private arbitration, in a private conf room, hidden from the American public. This is a democracy and this matter should be decided in an open court of law owned by the people. #sunlight

4:03 PM - 2 Apr 2018

Link to tweet

Michael Avenatti
‏@MichaelAvenatti

And the Declaration Mr. Cohen just filed is more interesting for what it DOES NOT state - it does not state that he never discussed the agreement with DJT, that DJT did not know about the agreement, or that DJT did not ultimately pay the $130k (all issues DJT is also silent on).

4:23 PM - 2 Apr 2018

Link to tweet

[HipChick]

1. Go ahead Avenatti!

[NCTraveler]

2. Trump and Co seem to be moving forward as if the NDA is in place.

A little slip here and there but nothing like Stormy and her lawyer. When is a judge going to rule on the validity of the NDA? That’s a necessary step before skipping arbitration.

[jberryhill]

7. When will the judge rule on validity?

That won’t happen until the question is timely briefed.

At this moment, the question of validity - or who should decide that question - is not before this court for a decision either way.

Avenatti telegraphed all of his arguments and authorities in his untimely brief for expedited discovery. Hence, while this motion to compel arbitration reads like a “response” to Avenatti’s rejected brief, it’s not.

Cohen’s brief argues and cites authority to the effect that the issue of validity itself is a matter for arbitration.

It is now Avenatti’s turn to argue that Daniels did not agree to arbitration and/or that the contract (and the arbitration clause) is not valid. Plus Avenatti will argue that these issues should be decided in court.

After that, Cohen gets to reply.


Once all that has happened, and the matter is fully briefed (provided it does not degenerate into cross motions to strike or for sanctions, if they all get excited), then the judge may set a hearing date, may retract that hearing date, or may decide to not have a hearing at all and simply decide on the papers. The judge will do that whenever the judge pleases.

I just got, last week, a ruling in a federal court case that has been fully briefed since last August. It’s not for nothing that the courts have been saying for some time that there are some serious budget and personnel issues.

The other thing that will happen is a SLAPP motion on the defamation claim, which will follow its own procedural track (as also telegraphed by Cohen’s brief).

If Daniels decides to settle in the meantime, then that can happen too - in a private conference room away from the American people, etc.

[Achilleaze]

3. What is republican family-values role model Dirty Donny* hiding?

...so much republican sleaze


* aka republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief

[dem4decades]

4. Does Avenatti have a case or is he just stirring the pot?

While I enjoy the shit stirring I want to see sworn testimony.

[tonyt53]

5. My lawyer friends say he has a case because of CA laws are applied to the NDA.

[jberryhill]

6. Both of Avenattis points are addressed in the motion

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4429429/4-2-18-Essential-Consultant-Motion-to-Compel.pdf

The irony of Avenatti tweeting that the matter should be decided in court is, I suppose, lost on many.

His argument might best be directed to the court, because the judge probably does not follow him on Twitter.

[Cha]

8. #Sunlight