Credit: MEGA
Erika Jayne will not be seeing any of the proceeds or damages from the $750,000 earrings her now-estranged husband, Thomas Girardi, reportedly purchased for her in 2007 with funds belonging to clients of his now-defunct law firm, Girardi Keese.
After the 53-year-old Real Housewives of Beverly Hills star turned the jewelry over to a trustee in charge of Thomas’ bankruptcy case and later filed an appeal against the ruling that made her do so, a judge ruled that Thomas, 85, did, in fact, use commingled funds to buy the earrings, thus making them the property of his bankruptcy estate.
“Today’s the big day,” attorney Ronald Richards began in a message shared on X, formerly known as Twitter, on September 24. “This hearing will determine if the Trustee has shown the funds used to purchase the diamond earrings were estate property and if so, then Erika cannot recover the earrings or any damages.”
In a second message, Ronald revealed that Larry Gabriel was representing the trustee and Evan Borges was representing Erika.
“Judges starts off by saying the ‘famous earrings,'” he continued, noting that the judge overruled evidentiary objections and refused to allow certain testimony from the trustee’s expert.
After spending what was described as a lot of time reading through paperwork pertaining to the case, the judge said he assumed the earrings were the property of the estate but acknowledged the confusion surrounding the jewelry.
According to Ronald, even if the judge ruled in favor of Erika, that wouldn’t mean she was the rightful owner of the earrings. Instead, it would simply indicate that the earrings, which were sold at auction in December 2022, did not belong to the estate.
“He says there was commingling and Erika presented no evidence showing there was no commingling. He also pointed out the new evidence presented in the [trustee’s brief] further [supported] there was commingling … Fees were still owed so there was still commingling,” Ronald explained.
Then, in a third update, Ronald seemed sure that Erika would lose her appeal.
“Erika’s attorney is trying to take one stab at this: He says the problem with the evidence is that it is ‘ancient’ and ‘unreliable.’ He is saying nobody knows. However, the judge says Girardi was owed fees and they were in the account so there was commingling,” he wrote.
Erika’s attorney responded, stating that if $65 million came into the firm, they were entitled to $20 million, but the judge stood firm.
“The [$750,000] was commingled, period. Girardi’s fees were still left in the account,” Ronald continued. “The judge said the issue is not whether it was a theft, the issue is whether the trust account was commingled, the court then says, ‘Don’t you lose?’ It was to cover up a theft. The earrings were not a court cost and the purchase was a fraud. It was not for court costs but for earrings. the only issue is whether the funds were commingled. Erika is going to lose this motion, period.”
Once the ruling was announced, Ronald offered another update, confirming that it had been determined that the funds were commingled.
“Even Erika’s attorney concedes that is a reasonable inference,” Ronald shared.
After the court incorrectly mentioned that Erika maintained ownership of the earrings, alleging that she wasn’t entitled to the money, it was further ordered that the earrings were the property of the estate.
There was also news about the $25 million lawsuit against Erika, with Ronald revealing that the case had been continued to November 29 and noting that her attorney was shot down when he asked for a 90-day continuance.
