Getting clear on who represents R. Allen Stanford

R. Allen Stanford now should have a clear understanding of who represents his interests. During a three-hour hearing on June 3, U.S. District Judge Nancy Atlas of the Southern District of Texas asked all of Stanford’s current and former lawyers in the courtroom about the work they’ve done for the jailed Houston businessman either in his criminal case, United States v. Robert Allen Stanford, et al., or in a civil action pending against Stanford in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stanford International Bank Ltd., et al.Atlas convened the unusual hearing after Stanford complained that he’d never met some of the lawyers who represent him, and he had no idea what they have done for him, even though insurance companies have paid lawyers more than $6 million for his defense. “I don’t know who was and who wasn’t on the case,” Stanford told Atlas at a hearing on May 25 in an insurance coverage suit in her court, Laura Pendergest-Holt, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, et al. In that case, Atlas will determine whether insurance companies Lloyd’s of London and Arch Specialty Insurance Co. should pay for Stanford’s defense in his criminal case and the SEC civil suit. But on June 3, after hearing from a stream of lawyers, Stanford confirmed to Atlas that his current criminal team consists of lead defense counsel Robert S. Bennett, of Bennett Nguyen Joint Venture in Houston, and Michael Essmyer, of Houston’s Essmyer, Tritico & Rainey. Also on his criminal-defense team are consulting attorneys Alan M. Dershowitz, a professor at Harvard Law School, solo practitioner Martin G. Weinberg of Boston, and a number of attorneys working for Bennett Nguyen Joint Venture. For the SEC civil suit, Stanford confirmed that Brewer Law Group of Washington, D.C., represents him. Additionally, Stanford said Michael Sydow, of Houston’s Sydow & McDonald is “in” on the SEC suit. However, after Neel Lane, a partner in Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in San Antonio who represents the insurance companies in the coverage suit, showed him a copy of a letter Stanford had sent to the underwriters in late 2009 saying Sydow no longer represents him, Stanford said he doesn’t remember signing that letter. Sydow, who earlier had told Atlas he was continuing to represent Stanford in the SEC suit, told Atlas on June 3 that he will abide by the wishes of his client. Stanford, who has gone through a number of criminal-defense attorneys, may ask U.S. District Judge David Hittner of the Southern District of Texas, who presides over the criminal case, to add Las Vegas attorney David Chesnoff to his team. Chesnoff, a member of Chesnoff & Schonfeld, says Stanford wants him to be his lead trial attorney, and “as an American citizen, he’s entitled to a defense of his choice.” When Atlas noted that Bennett also is well-known, Chesnoff said, “I don’t want to be flippant, your honor, but I’m more well-known.” Bennett is the lead attorney in Stanford’s criminal case, and even though Essmyer asked to be removed from the case due to “irreconcilable differences” with Bennett over trial strategy and other matters, Hittner signed an order on June 1 denying that request. Stanford may soon lose some more lawyers. Christina Sarchio, a partner in Patton Boggs in Washington, D.C., working on the SEC suit, told Atlas on June 3 that her firm intends to file a motion to withdraw from representing Stanford in that case. In an interview, Sarchio says Patton Boggs wants to withdraw because of “irreconcilable differences” with Stanford’s “current criminal counsel.” In response, Essmyer says, “I met her at the FDC [Federal Detention Center] in Houston, and those meetings were all cordial.” Bennett did not return a telephone call seeking comment. Sarchio also notes that the insurance companies, after Stanford told Atlas on May 25 that he had “no idea” what Patton Boggs has done for him, notified the firm that they would not pay its most recent invoice for filing a motion to dismiss. Stanford has pleaded not guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges related to an alleged conspiracy to defraud investors who bought about $7 billion in certificates of deposit sold through Stanford International Bank Ltd., as have the other defendants. Stanford represented himself pro se at the May 25 hearing, but Atlas allowed Bennett to enter an appearance at the June 3 hearing for Stanford. Stanford has been in federal prison since he was indicted in June 2009.
--Brenda Sapino Jeffreys