A recent court filing made on behalf of Michael Cohen, a former lawyer for Donald Trump, has come under scrutiny for possibly referencing non-existent cases. This potential discrepancy was uncovered by U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York. In a two-page order issued on Tuesday, Judge Furman pointed out that Cohen’s attorney, David M. Schwartz, used three alleged cases as precedents for “District Court decisions, affirmed by the Second Circuit Court, granting early termination of supervised release.”
David M. Schwartz, a solo practitioner in New York, represented Cohen in this matter. However, the validity of these cited cases is now in question. The issue at hand is whether these cases cited by Mr. Schwartz actually exist, or if they have been inaccurately represented in the court documents.
The potential implications of this discovery could be significant, both for Cohen’s case and the reputation of his legal representation. It remains to be seen how the court will address this matter moving forward. Details pertaining to this issue can be further explored in the original report on law.com.