Fox News Asks Judge to Toss Michael Avenatti Defamation Lawsuit

LOS ANGELES—The Fox News network this week filed a scathing response to a lawsuit by the embattled attorney Michael Avenatti, who in 2018 represented AVN Hall of Famer Stormy Daniels in her two lawsuits against Donald Trump. Avenatti filed the suit on november 12 of last year, alleging that the popular cable news network and several Fox News on-air personalities defamed him in its reporting of his November 2018 arrest on allegations of domestic violence.  Ultimately, the arrest resulted in no charges being filed against Avenatti — who since went on to face a slew of other legal troubles over alleged financial misdeeds, including prosecutors’ charges that he embezzled approximately $300,000 from Daniels. Avenatti’s lawsuit, which was initially filed Delaware State Superior Court, claims that Fox News and its on-air talent — including top-rated evening hosts Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, along with eight others — engaged in “purposeful and misleading efforts” to “malign and defame” him, as well as to “destroy his reputation and his livelihood, and eliminate him as an adversary and threat to President Donald J. Trump.” The lawsuit has since been moved to a federal court in Delaware, where Fox News asked a judge to throw out Avenatti’s lawsuit, in its Wednesday filing. In the suit, Avenatti notes that Fox News wrongly identified the alleged victim in the incident for which he was arrested as his “estranged wife,” when in reality she was his girlfriend, and also that he was “charged” with assault when in fact he was never charged. Fox also reported, according to the complaint, that the alleged victim’s "face was swollen and bruised," and that Avenatti had declared to police, "She hit me first!.” His lawsuit says that both allegations are false. According to UCLA legal scholar Eugene Volokh, Avenatti’s lawsuit bears little hope of succeeding, because while Fox may have made some errors in its reporting, its coverage meets the standards of being “substantially true,” which is generally an accepted defense against defamation lawsuits. Also, at the time of the arrest and news reports, Avenatti had already become a prominent public figure, Volokh noted, making almost daily media appearances to discuss the Daniels lawsuit, and to criticize Trump.  The legal standard for defamation against a public figure is higher. Avenatti would be required to prove that Fox News knew that its statements about Avenatti were false, or that they displayed “reckless disregard” for the truth in broadcasting them. Both appear unlikely to be proven in court, according to the UCLA legal expert. In its response to Avenatti’s lawsuit, Fox News accuses Avenatti of “forum shopping” and “libel tourism” by filing his lawsuit in Delaware, which Fox says has no connection to the case. Avenatti was arrested in Los Angeles, but according to the Fox court filing, the one-year deadline for filing a defamation suit had expired, leading Avenatti to seek another venue. The Fox response also states that its reporting on Avenatti’s arrest was “substantially true,” and says that Avenatti “nitpicks legal technicalities” in the Fox reporting of his arrest. Fox also noted that even though Avenatti was never charged in the case, “courts have repeatedly rejected his claim that a report that an arrested individual was 'charged' with a crime is defamatory.” Avenatti seeks punitive damages “in excess of $200 million” against Fox News, and demands in his suit that the case be tried by a jury. Photo By mroach / Wikimedia Commons