REAL Housewives of Beverly Hills star Erika Jayne is still not having any luck when it comes to her legal issues, as she’s now on the verge of losing a $300,000 suit brought by a designer.
Erika, 53, accused the costume business Marco Marco of illegally overcharging her American Express card for up to $900,000.
5
5
5
Christopher Psaila and partner Marco Morante, who own the business and have designed for the likes of Britney Spears and Katy Perry, spent years working on costumes for Erika.
The pair sued Erika over her claim, accusing her of a conspiracy to try and win back money she was never wrongly charged for in the first place.
And despite Erika battling against the pair, she may now instantly forfeit and have to fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars after her lawyer failed to show up to a crucial hearing.
Psaila is suing Erika in California, while Morante has filed a separate lawsuit in Florida.
The Florida suit states “tortious interference with business relationships, tortious interference with contracts, defamation, defamation by implication,” among other accusations.
Morante is suing Erika, along with her assistants Laia Ribatallada and Michael Minden, for more than $300,000 each.
But she could be set to lose the suit as Erika’s lawyer allegedly didn’t show up for a case management conference, according to docs.
Attorney Jim Wilkes also allegedly didn’t correctly file his motion to dismiss the case and the court has now struck the motion.
BRIBERY CLAIMS
“The Court will entertain a motion for default by Plaintiff,” new court filings read, meaning Morante could win the case without a trial.
Lawyer Ronald Richards, who was special litigation counsel for her ex Tom Girardi’s bankruptcy trustee in another case, posted about the recent update on the Morante suit on X on Friday.
He wrote, “@erikajayne is in hot water now and is on the verge of losing this lawsuit.”
The U.S. Sun has reached out to Erika’s lawyer, Jim Wilkes, who is also representing her assistants, for comment.
Erika, along with the other defendants, have denied any wrongdoing.
Meanwhile, in the California suit, Psaila is accusing Erika of intentionally filing for fraudulent refunds through American Express and then bribing a Secret Service agent through her husband to pursue false felony charges against him.
Psaila, who is suing for more than $18 million, was charged in 2017 with wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, but the case was dismissed in September 2021.
The designer is suing for “malicious prosecution and conspiracy,” and Erika’s recent motion to dismiss the suit has been denied.
However, the former head of the Secret Service in Los Angeles and two agents have since been excused from the suit.
“This case reflects the corruption of the federal judicial system,” Psaila’s lawsuit alleges.
‘FALSELY ACCUSED’
“The Secret Service and United States should have never presented the case to the grand jury for indictment, and never proceeded with the prosecution.”
Marco Marco allegedly took a huge hit because of the alleged fraud scheme.
“Chris Psaila suffered extreme emotional distress, financial harm to his business, Marco Marco, and extreme emotional, psychological, and physical injuries as a result of the four and one-half years battle against these illicit charges,” his attorney previously said in a statement.
“Mr. Psaila’s business lost clients, retailers, and employees, resulting in lost profits and goodwill totaling tens of millions of dollars.
“His younger brother tragically drowned, and the charges impeded his ability to support his father as he was dying of cancer.
“Mr. Psaila’s father and brother both died while he was falsely accused of serious crimes.
“Adding to the devastation, Mr. Psaila and his husband were preparing to adopt an infant, but an adoption agency told them they could not proceed because of the pending charges.”
Erika previously told the Los Angeles Times she remained convinced that Psaila had falsely billed her for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The Marco Marco suits are not the only legal issues Erika is still facing following her ex being sentenced for wire fraud.
Erika is still being sued for more than $24 million in a civil lawsuit brought by Girardi’s bankruptcy trustee, Elissa Miller.
NEW TRIAL
Girardi was found guilty last year of four counts of wire fraud after being accused of embezzling $15 million from clients in a “10-year Ponzi scheme.”
Miller filed the suit against Jayne in September 2021, claiming she knew that her estranged husband’s firm, Girardi Keese, was secretly paying her expenses between 2007 and 2020.
Erika, who has never been charged with a crime, has always denied any wrongdoing, insisting she had no idea about her then-husband’s business dealings.
Now, The U.S. Sun can reveal a judge has been assigned to the case and a trial date will soon be set in District Court in California.
A source with knowledge of the case said, “She’s never going to settle,” adding that the trial will likely take place after June.
The trustee argued in court docs that Erika used Girardi’s personal American Express credit cards “to pay for expenses she incurred in pursuit for her entertainment career.”
Erika’s legal team insists the payments were booked and accounted for solely as an alleged debt of EJ Global, not an individual liability or debt of the reality star.
They further claim, “No promissory note exists to memorialize the alleged debt owing to Girardi Keese by EJ Global, LLC; and Girardi Keese was fully capable of preparing such a written memorialization of EJ Global, LLC’s alleged debt obligation but never did so.
“The Trustee’s above-referenced accusations that Ms. Girardi knowingly and willingly participated in a criminal enterprise are false, not supported by any evidence whatsoever, malicious, and should be stricken.
“Not even the federal prosecutors in Mr. Giardi’s recent criminal trial (where neither side called Ms. Girardi as a witness) alleged that Ms. Girardi did anything wrong at the time, including in connection with Girardi’ Keese’s payments of EJ Global, LLC’s expenses.”
They added that Erika’s only mistake was “trusting her then-husband, an ostensibly successful and sophisticated attorney.”
5
5
