Criminally Indicted Aventura Moves To Disqualify Attorney of End User They Are Suing
Suing one's customer is rare enough in physical security, but Aventura has now taken the unusual step of moving to disqualify their end-user's attorney as the company seeks $500,000+ in damages.
Aventura is under criminal indictment and is running out of money. In this report, we examine Aventura's latest atypical move and the likelihood of success.
**********
******** ***** * ******* ******* *******, a ************ ******* *** ******** *** user, ** *** **** ***** ***** in **** ****.
*** **** ******** ****** *******'* ******* to *** ******** *** * ****** of **** ***** ******* **** ******* purchased ** ****. ******* ***** ******** $245,000 ** ****** ** ******* *** canceled *** ****** ****** **** ******* when *** ** ********** ******** *********** ********* ********** **** *** *************(***, ** ***** **, ********** ********* who **** *** ** ******* **** Aventura ******** **** "**** ** *** USA").
***************** ***** * ****** *** ******* judgment (***)******* *******, * ***** ******** **** attempts ** ***** ***** ** ******** that ***** *** ** ******* ******* disputes. *** ***** ****** *** *** because ******** ****** ********** ******** *** converted *** *** **** * *********.
************ ************* ******** ***** *** ****** of ********** ******** ****. *************** *** *********** ******* ****, ****** * ***** for ********** ******* ********* $***,*** *** to *******'* ******* ** ****** ******** of ********'* *******.
******** ***** ********* ** ********** *******'* ********, ******* ********, ** ********* **, 2023.
Aventura's ***** ** ********** *******'* ********
******** ** ****** ** ********** **. Schwartz *** *** ****, ***** ******** Flexner ***, ** *** ******* **** Mr. ******** **** ****** ** ****** to **** ********* **** **** ** material ** *** ******* ** *** case.
* ***, ******** ****** ** **** is**. ********'* ***** **** ** *** phone ***** **** *** ******* ***** Claudio ****** ** ******** ** *** 20, ****, ** ***** ***** ****** "******* (but *** *** *****)" ******* ** cancel *** ****** ** ********.
******** ******** **. ********'* *******. ***** Peace, *** ** ******** *** *** Eastern ******** ** *** ****,***** ** **. ********** ***** **** ***** *** "******** impression **** ******* ***** **** ** Trimble *** ******* ** ******** *** under *********." ********* ** **. *****, the "********** ********" **** **. ******** spoke **** ** ******** ** - presumably, ******* ***** ****** - **** Mr. ******** **** "*** ***** ******* by ******** ****not **** ********** in connection with the government's criminal case" [emphasis added]. That directly contradicts Mr. Schwartz.
**. ********'* ********* **** ** ********. The ******* ******** ** *** ***** conversations **** ***** ****** ** ******** 2019 **** *** *** ***** ****** Trimble's ******* ** *** ********.
****'* ** ******** ** ******* **. Schwartz's *** ********* ************ *** *** his **** **** ******* ** ******* to *******. ***** ** ********** ***** does *** ** *** ** ****** disqualify ** ********** **** ***** **** to **** *********. ***** ***, **** cases **** ** *********** **** ********** or **********, ********** ********** *******.
***, ** *** ****, ********* ********* apply ** ********* **** *******. ********* to **** *.*(*) ** ****** **** ***** *** ***********'* ***** of ************ *******:
* ******shall *** *** ** ******** ****** * ******** ** * ****** ** ***** *** ****** ** ****** ** ** * ******* ** * *********** ***** ** **** ******:
(*) *** *********relates ****** ** ** *********** *****;
(*) *** ********* ******* ****** ** the ****** *** ***** ** ***** services ******** ** *** ******;
(*) **************** ** *** ****** *****work *********** ******** ** *** ******;
(*) *** ********* **** ****** ****** to * ****** ** *********, *** there ** ** ****** ** ******* that *********** ******** **** ** ******* in ********** ** *** *********; **
(*) *** ********* ** ********** ** the ********.
[******** *****]
**. ******** **** ** * "******* on * *********** ***** ** ****," and **'* **** ***** **** *** testimony **** *** ****** "****** ** an *********** *****" - ******** ******** disputes **. ********'* *******.
**** ******* **** ****** ***** ** that ************* **. ******** ***** ***** them "*********** ********." **. ******** *** represented ******* ** **** ****** *** more **** * *****, *** ******** a *** ******** ***** ******* ******* to ****** *********** **** *** ********* (and *** **** ************ *******, ***** new ******** ***** **** ** ******* get ** ** ***** **** *** facts ** *** ****). ** *** judge ***** **** ************* **. ******** would ***** ******* *********** ********, **. Schwartz **** ** ******* ** ******** serving ** ***** *******.
** **** ****** **** ****** **** the ***** ***** * ********.
Aventura ******* *** ** *****
*** ****** *** **** *** ********, which ** ******* ******* *** ** funds ** ****** ****** ** *** criminal ****** ******* ** *** ** government. ****** ** ********** *******'* ******** could ** ** ******* ** ***** Trimble ** *** *********** *****. *** harder **** ******** ***** ****** *** Trimble, *** ******** **** ******* **** agree ** * ********** - ***** would *** ***** ***** ** ********'* pockets.
******* ******* ***** ***** ******* **** a ****** ********** ** ***** **** by ****** * ****** *** ******* judgment (***). *** ******** ******* ***** an *** **** **** ***** ******* suit ** ****, ****** **** *** ****** ** ****** more **** ***. **** *** ** *** ******** has ***** *** ******* **** ** moving ** ********** **. ********.
Choose **** ****** *********
*** ******** *. ******* **** ** a ******** **** *** ***** ****** be ******* **** **** *** ******** a ******. ********** ** *** ******** of ********'* ***** *********, **'* ***** reasonable **** * ********* *********** **** Trimble ***** ** ********* ** *** a ******* ****'* ***** ******** **********. The ****** ********* ***** **** **** avoided ** ******* *** ****** * different ****** - ***** **** ********** needed ** ** ******, ***** ******** was ********.
Update */**: Trimble ******* ********'* ****** ** ************ ********* **. ******* ************ *** not ***** **** ************* **. ******** would ****** ***** ******. *******, **** said ****:
- ******** ****** *** ******* ** ********** Mr. ******** ******* **'* ***** ***** at ***** ***** *, ****, **** he ***** ** ****** ** ** testify. ********* ** *******, "****** **** ******* ** ********** *****, as ****,the ****** ***** ****** ** ****** ** *** ************** ** ***** ** * ****** ******" [******** *****].
- **. ******** **** *** ** * necessary *******. ********* ** *******, *** key ***** ** ******* ** *** case ** "******* ******** ** ... * ******** enterprise," *** *** ******* ** **. Schwartz's **** **** *** ******* ***** Lipcic.
- ***** ** ** ****** ** ********** Mr. ********'* ****** ****, ***** ******** Flexner ***. ******* ****** ** **** 3.7(b)(1) ** ****** **** ***** *** ***********'* ***** of ************ *******, ***** ** **** ***** **** an ****** **** **** **** ** disqualified **** * ****** ***** *********** testimony ******* ***** ****** (***** ******* says ***'* *** **** ****).
*** ***** **************'* ****** ** ********** ******** *******, concluding: