JPMorgan Chase has been ordered to keep paying convicted fraudster Charlie Javice‘s legal bills, with a Delaware judge rejecting the banking giant’s bid to halt what it called “astronomical” defense costs that have now topped $70 million.
Delaware Chancery Court Magistrate Judge Christian Wright said in his ruling on Thursday that JPMorgan failed to meet its “challenging burden” of proving that Javice’s legal fees were “so unmistakably unreasonable or clearly abusive” that they could only have resulted from bad faith.
The decision requires JPMorgan to continue advancing roughly $10.1 million in disputed legal fees incurred by Javice between January and September 2025.
Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported that Javice is seeking a presidential pardon as she seeks to overturn her March 2025 conviction for defrauding JPMorgan into paying $175 million for Frank, the college financial-aid startup she founded.
The bank also sought to stop paying the legal fees of former Frank chief growth officer Olivier Amar, who was convicted alongside Javice and sentenced to 68 months in prison.
Wright rejected that request, too, ruling JPMorgan must continue advancing approximately $11.3 million in Amar’s disputed legal fees covering a similar period.
The latest ruling means JPMorgan remains on the hook for legal costs that now exceed $70 million for Javice alone and more than $136 million combined for her and Amar, according to court filings.
JPMorgan argued that the costs had spiraled out of control and sought to end its obligation to bankroll Javice’s defense under advancement rights stemming from its 2021 acquisition of Frank.
The dispute has featured some eyebrow-raising accusations by JPMorgan over what it says were lavish charges buried in Javice’s legal bills.
In separate court filings unsealed last year, the bank claimed defense lawyers sought reimbursement for $530 worth of gummy bears, more than $3,000 in first-class airfare, a $581 dinner that included a $161 seafood tower and more than $25,800 in luxury hotel upgrades.
JPMorgan also objected to charges that it said included a $284 car ride covering just half a mile, cocktails and wine, cellulite butter, a Spotify subscription, a suitcase, a Cookie Monster toddler toy, a pet hair roller, a coffee maker and even transportation to the American Museum of Natural History.
Javice’s spokesman countered that none of the disputed expenses were incurred, used or approved by her, saying they were attorney expenses that the bank was using to distract from its contractual obligation to advance her legal fees.
“We appreciate the court’s time and attention to this matter,” JPMorgan spokesman Pablo Rodriguez said in a statement to The Post.
“We respectfully disagree with the Delaware decision about the bounds of reasonableness and are considering next steps.”
Federal prosecutors said Javice falsely claimed Frank had data on more than 4 million students when it actually had information on only about 300,000, enabling her to pocket tens of millions of dollars from the sale.
She was later sentenced to 85 months in prison and is appealing both her conviction and sentence.
JPMorgan has been paying Javice’s legal bills since June 2023 under an earlier Delaware court order requiring the bank to advance defense costs while the underlying litigation proceeds.
The Delaware dispute centers on advancement rights rather than whether Javice is ultimately entitled to indemnification.
Under Delaware corporate law and the merger agreements governing the Frank acquisition, JPMorgan has been required to front legal expenses while challenges over the scope and reasonableness of those bills play out.
Wright concluded the bank had not shown the invoices were so excessive that they reflected bad faith, allowing the advancement obligations to continue despite Javice’s criminal conviction.
The Post has sought comment from Javice.
