Inset: Patrick Byrne speaks during a panel discussion at the Nebraska Election Integrity Forum on Saturday, Aug. 27, 2022, in Omaha, Neb. (AP Photo/Rebecca S. Gratz). Main: Hunter Biden sits for a wide-ranging interview on Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan in July 2025 (Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan/YouTube).
In a dramatic turn of events, efforts are underway to halt Hunter Biden’s defamation lawsuit from advancing to a default judgment against Patrick Byrne, the former CEO of Overstock. Two attorneys, barred from representing Byrne in the California proceedings, have raised allegations that an associate of Byrne’s earlier legal team may have engaged in “deliberate sabotage” through her appearance and conduct just before the trial went awry.
On Wednesday, a legal filing by Peter Ticktin, representing himself, Stefanie Lambert, and Byrne, was submitted to request a stay of the lawsuit. This pause is sought until the U.S. Supreme Court can weigh in. The filing avoided directly naming the “associate counsel” linked to attorney Michael Murphy, but it did criticize her court appearance.
Ticktin described the associate’s courtroom attire as a pantsuit “covered in cat hair,” paired with “old muddy tennis shoes,” and a “Free Palestine” pin on her jacket. This occurred just a day before U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson postponed the late July trial. The trial was to address Byrne’s allegedly defamatory accusations that Biden was involved in serious crimes, including bribery and dealings with Iran.
Ticktin argued that Murphy was ill-prepared for the trial, having failed to examine the “contents of the Hunter Biden laptop” intended as evidence. He suggested that the associate’s attire only further reflected the lack of readiness:
As reported by Law&Crime, Byrne did not attend the court proceedings in person and dismissed his legal counsel as the trial was about to commence—a move that resulted in sanctions. Byrne’s subsequent attempts to have Lambert and Ticktin represent him in a state where they aren’t licensed to practice, under a pro hac vice arrangement, were denied, leaving him to defend himself without legal representation.
Lambert, a Michigan attorney facing charges for allegedly attempting to tamper with voting machines during the 2020 election, and Ticktin, a Florida lawyer who faced sanctions in Donald Trump’s failed RICO lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, have argued that Byrne should be permitted to choose his own legal representation for the case.
Lambert — a Michigan lawyer who was indicted for allegedly trying to tamper with voting machines used in the 2020 election and who was previously disqualified from representing Byrne in a Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit for “relentless misconduct” — and Florida’s Ticktin — one of the attorneys sanctioned in Donald Trump’s failed RICO lawsuit against Hillary Clinton — have maintained that Byrne should be allowed to have the “counsel of choice” on the case.
To do anything other than that, the lawyers said while failing to sway the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, is a “severe violation of [Byrne’s] constitutional rights.”
While Lambert was denied pro hac vice admission from the start, Ticktin was briefly allowed on the case “for a day or two” — before Biden’s attorneys urged the judge to reverse himself, which Wilson then did.
That, Ticktin said, created the very situation Biden complained about, calling it “a tempest of Mr. Biden’s own making.”
“[I]t was the Plaintiff Biden who caused the removal of the Defendant Byrne’s attorneys, creating the problem here,” Ticktin wrote. “Regardless of whether that was right or wrong, Mr. Biden surely had to consider the likely effect of further delay to the case.”
The filing three times misspelled Byrne’s last name as “Bryne.”
Byrne separately filed a declaration calling Ticktin a “talented trial lawyer” and Lambert’s expertise “needed to try this case due to her specialized knowledge” as he awaits Biden’s motion for a default judgment on damages, which will follow Wilson’s Oct. 8 pro forma entry of a default against the defendant.
When Law&Crime previously asked Ticktin about his and Lambert’s appellate attempts to represent Byrne, he criticized Murphy and referred to his associate as “woke.”
“Patrick Byrne and his attorneys were ready to proceed on the date of trial. Unfortunately, one of his attorneys brought a woke associate who was dressed inappropriately, and he was not prepared. As a result, that attorney and his associate were terminated on the spot,” Ticktin said, adding the judge’s reversal in Biden’s favor had “created an untenable situation.”
Law&Crime reached out to Murphy for comment.
