Eliot Spitzer, Coughlin Stoia in Campaign-Fund Smackdown

[WSJ_law_blog]

We kind of thought, sadly, that we’d heard the last of both Bill Lerach and Eliot Spitzer, at least for a little while. So imagine our surprise when we stumbled across a story that includes both of them — and bears news that they’re pitted against each other (or at least their organizations are)! Ah, like manna from the Law Blog heavens!

Actually, manna from the New York Sun. Here’s the tale: Folks out at Coughlin Stoia, Bill Lerach’s former firm, are reportedly “fuming” over the fact that disgraced former New York governor Eliot Spitzer’s campaign is giving “vague answers” over whether they plan to return donations to Spitzer’s defunct reelection bid.

According to the Sun, a host of donors to Spitzer’s defunct re-election bid are said to be seeking refunds of campaign donations. But lawyers at Coughlin Stoia “feel they have a particularly compelling claim.” In 2006, Spitzer’s team reportedly returned more than $17,000 in donations from the firm and its employees after it became clear prosecutors were homing in on Lerach. Spitzer’s committee sent back all money connected with both Lerach Coughlin, as it was known at the time, and Milberg Weiss, Lerach’s previous firm. The tallies: $35,000 from Milberg Weiss and $7,500 from Lerach Coughlin.

However, reports the Sun, days after Lerach quit the new firm and entered a guilty plea in the criminal case last year, Spitzer’s folks were back in contact with Coughlin Stoia, seeking not only new contributions, but also makeup gifts for the money refunded a year earlier.

Some decided to give again. Some now regret that decision. “This donation was solicited under misleading circumstances — that Spitzer would continue his policies and practices of vigorous and principled law enforcement,” wrote Coughlin Stoia lawyer Patrick Daniels. “Mr. Spitzer should be held accountable for the costs of shutting down his own campaign, which he was responsible for destroying.”

A Spitzer representative said the campaign was “disbanding” and paying “outstanding bills,” but reportedly did not commit even to a partial refund. “Any remaining funds will be distributed in accordance with all applicable laws,” she wrote.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons