Aug. 9 2023, Printed 3:00 p.m. ET
A person owed hundreds of thousands from Erika Jayne’s disgraced husband Tom Girardi has fired again on the Actual Housewives of Beverly Hills star in courtroom, RadarOnline.com has realized.
As RadarOnline.com first reported, Jayne’s estranged husband Tom Girardi was pressured out of business by his collectors in 2020. The once-respected lawyer, who was later disbarred, was accused of operating his agency, Girardi Keese, like a Ponzi scheme.
Article continues beneath commercial
Lots of his purchasers shared comparable tales involving Girardi. They claimed he was capable of safe monetary settlements in authorized disputes however had excuses when it got here time to pay out the cash.
Not too long ago, Girardi and his associates had been charged with wire fraud. Prosecutors accused Jayne’s husband of embezzling $18 million from purchasers between 2010 to 2020.
Jayne has been dragged into the case after the trustee presiding over the regulation agency’s chapter sued her for $25 million. The lawsuit demanded she return cash the agency spent to pay the payments for Jayne’s firm, EJ World.
Article continues beneath commercial
The truth star has denied having any information of her estranged husband’s monetary dealings. She stated she believed he was a particularly excessive earner who may afford their lavish life-style.
As we first reported, Jayne just lately requested the courtroom to not approve sure funds the trustee supposed to make to collectors. The Bravo star accused the trustee of shifting too rapidly and dashing to “make reckless agreements” with “purported” collectors.
Article continues beneath commercial
Jayne claimed she just lately uncovered alleged fraud dedicated within the chapter. She stated her attorneys have launched an investigation into the matter and will likely be contacting the Division of Justice.
She claimed the trustee’s deliberate funds must be paused till she completes her investigation.
MORE ON:
Erika Jayne
Article continues beneath commercial
One of many collectors to obtain cost was Joseph Ruigomez and his household.
Ruigomez employed Girardi to symbolize him in a case towards Pacific Gasoline and Electrical Firm (PG&E) after a 2010 fuel pipeline explosion prompted him to be burned on over 90 p.c of his physique. His girlfriend died from the incident.
PG&E agreed to pay $11.5 million. Nevertheless, Ruigomez claimed Girardi did not pay him the total quantity and has been preventing to be paid within the chapter case.
Jayne stated whereas she has “nice sympathy” for Ruigomez, she stated he’s already been paid over $11 million.
She stated, “The Ruigomez collectors, whereas wholly deserving, have already got obtained tens of hundreds of thousands of {dollars} in money and different worth from GK. The Trustee shouldn’t be intimidated by threats of constant curiosity on the claims of the Ruigomez collectors, if additional investigation would present that further funds to them would quantity to a windfall exceeding their precise loss. Many different respectable creditor victims haven’t obtained a penny.”
Article continues beneath commercial
Now, in newly filed courtroom paperwork, obtained by RadarOnline.com, Ruigomez has fired again at her try and delay his cost. He argued that Jayne had beforehand alleged fraud however has but to current any proof of fraud and “doesn’t state how the alleged fraud pertains to this movement, or what the fraud is.”
He stated that “Erika’s counsel made comparable fraud allegations as Erika makes in her Opposition, The entire fraud allegations previously and within the Opposition had been and are merely conclusory statements by Erika’s counsel, which isn’t proof earlier than the Court docket.”
Ruigomez added, “And if there have been fraud upon the Court docket, why has Erika not filed proof of such fraud with the Court docket notably since this case has been pending for over 2 years and seven months.”
Ruigomez stated Jayne has claimed he’s not entitled to the $9.7 million cost that was to be paid by the trustee. “Once more, Erika has supplied no proof,” Ruigomez stated.
A choose has but to rule on the matter.