Time to update this after events in the last few hours over in California
Two of the three counts that Peter Stris and Shera Bechard have brought against Michael Avenatti have been thrown out. Avenatti has been granted leave to file to recover his costs against them. Naturally Avenatti is proclaiming a victory, but the third count has been allowed to proceed which Avenatti is appealing
We never knew what the counts were, and I'd speculated previously that it was a loss of income claim brought against Avenatti by Bechard in connection with him undermining her NDA with Broidy to the extent that Broidy ceased making payments on it. Such an action never looked likely to succeed given that Avenatti was never a signatory to the NDA. It now appears however, that the allegation might be that Avenatti has obtained personal details of her claim against Broidy through Keith Davidson, her former attorney and the person who represented her in having the original NDA drawn up - (Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's then self-styled 'fixer' drew that NDA up)
Why is this significant?
Well if Davidson has disclosed the true nature of the circumstances that led to the formation of the Bechard NDA, then he (Avenatti) knows who got Shera Bechard pregnant, which ultimately resulted in her having an abortion.
What could have happened is this I believe.
Avenatti has boxed Keith Davidson into a corner, as he had Michael Cohen. These two were then representing Bechard and Broidy respectively. Davidson would have been bound by client / attorney privilege and shouldn't disclose any information to Avenatti. But Davidson is in deep trouble over the Stormy Daniels NDA. The allegation seems to be that Avenatti has applied pressure to Davidson, (perhaps using Daniels as leverage) to secure details of the Bechard case and got it.
Bechard has subsequently fired Davidson and instructed Peter Stris to act for her (same attorney who represented Karen McDougall in her victory against AMI)
They sued Avenatti for seeking information about Bechard (and have also sued Davidson on the same motion)
It's perhaps worth looking at Avenatti's behaviour during the period which we now believe he's been in possession of the information. He has been leaving a trail of breadcrumbs about 'Roe' (a reference to the landmark abortion ruling Roe v Wade) and cryptically suggested it would be interesting to know how Donald Trump really thinks about it. He's also suggested on national television that we might one day discover that Broidy isn't the person who got the former playboy model pregnant and that the person who did it might very well be someone else. Who though?
Urm .. now why would Donald Trump's fixer be involved in drawing up the NDA for what is really a Californian affair. If only we could think of someone who has a history of chasing after playboy models? Why would an obscure GOP donor who has mysteriously benefited hugely in the last 18 months from Trump administration contracts, agree to pay $1.6M to a model. It's almost as if he's agreeing to take the fall for someone who needs to be protected
In the last half hour, Broidy has filed an emergency petition with the Californian courts to prevent the documentation being unsealed on the grounds that its embarrassing to him and will cause him both constitutional and reputational damage that would be irrepairable. He might get a 10 day stay on this, but his case is weakening