Los Angeles, California — A jury has awarded $100,000 in damages in a malpractice case involving prominent attorney Mark Geragos, who was accused of conspiring with the now-imprisoned Michael Avenatti to undermine a client’s legal claims against Nike. The case centered around allegations that Geragos played a role in facilitating Avenatti’s illegal conduct at the expense of his client, Gary Franklin, a youth basketball coach.
Geragos’ attorney, Sean Macias, argued that the jury concluded no harm was caused by Geragos’ actions. Macias maintained that the jury found Geragos did not contribute to any damage suffered by Franklin. “Since all claims state Franklin was not harmed and Geragos was not a ‘cause’ in any event, no one is liable,” Macias said.
On the other hand, plaintiff’s attorney Trent Copeland stated that the jury’s finding indicates Geragos was engaged in wrongful conduct by assisting Avenatti. He noted that while jurors recognized some wrongdoing, they also concluded that Geragos didn’t breach a fiduciary duty to Franklin nor did he significantly impact Franklin’s ability to negotiate a settlement. “What is clear is that the jury found that Mr. Geragos engaged in wrongful conduct by substantially aiding and abetting Avenatti’s illegal conduct,” Copeland emphasized.
The jury spent six days hearing testimony and deliberated for about five hours before reaching a verdict. Although Geragos received a damaged verdict of $100,000, this amount fell short of what Franklin’s legal team aimed to secure, which ranged from $15 to $25 million. Franklin ultimately settled with Nike for $160,000 in 2022 after initially seeking more than a million.
Notably, the jury was instructed by Judge Steve Cochran that there was no evidence supporting Franklin’s claim that Nike was willing to settle for $1.5 million. Despite rejecting fraud claims against Geragos, jurors said he provided “knowingly substantial assistance or encouragement” to Avenatti in his misconduct against Franklin.
In testimonies, it was revealed that Franklin initially sought to retain Avenatti instead of Geragos due to pressures from Nike employees to funnel payments to players. Geragos denied any obligation to prioritize Franklin’s interests while he claimed to be mediating between Avenatti and Nike. The defense argued there was no legitimate offer from Nike, with Macias stating that the meetings were part of an FBI sting operation.
During the trial, videos were presented showing Avenatti denying Geragos’ claims of acting as a mediator. The jury also observed text exchanges between Geragos and Avenatti, revealing discussions about negotiations with Nike. Avenatti, who is serving time for unrelated federal crimes, previously introduced Geragos to the adult film actress Stormy Daniels in 2018.
Both lawyers expressed their discontent with the verdict and its implications. Geragos, who has faced scrutiny throughout his career, was not charged with any wrongdoing in relation to these claims despite the gravity of the situation.
As the verdict comes to light, the case underscores the complexities inherent in legal representation and the relationships between attorneys and their clients. The jury’s decision raises questions about the limits of professional conduct and the ethical obligations lawyers owe to their clients.
This automated article was generated by OpenAI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may not be entirely accurate, and any article can be requested removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.