Charlie Jarvis Seeks New Trial Following Allegations of Conflict of Interest
Charlie Jarvis, recently found guilty of defrauding JPMorgan Chase out of $175 million, is pushing for a new trial. He argues that a law clerk from the presiding judge’s office took a position at a law firm representing the bank after the trial concluded.
In a complaint lodged in Manhattan federal court, the 33-year-old lawyer contends that two clerks working for Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein were offered jobs at Davis Polk & Wardwell, a prominent law firm associated with JPMorgan Chase & Co.
“This promise wasn’t disclosed to the defense until October 2025, which is after both the trial and sentencing. This situation presents a clear conflict of interest that suggests impropriety,” read the filing from Jarvis’ legal team.
Jarvis and his attorneys are focusing on Hellerstein, despite a federal judge in Manhattan remarking in late September that Jarvis, sentenced to seven years in prison, was “a good person who did bad things.”
During the sentencing, Hellerstein noted how moving Jarvis’ plea for mercy was, especially her mention of her Holocaust-survivor grandmother, acknowledging her charitable efforts.
“I hand down sentences not because someone is inherently bad, but because of the actions they’ve taken,” Hellerstein remarked, before expressing doubt that Jarvis would engage in further criminal behavior, while stressing the need to deter others.
Jarvis was convicted on charges of conspiracy, wire fraud, bank fraud, and securities fraud, accused of falsely claiming that his fintech company, Frank Inc., had 4.25 million users when the actual number was around 300,000. This misleading information led JPMorgan to purchase the company for $175 million.
The filing reveals that two of Judge Hellerstein’s clerks worked at Davis Polk as summer associates in 2023 and accepted full-time offers afterwards, delaying their start to September 2025 to finalize paperwork.
The motion also highlighted a newspaper article stating that Hellerstein appeared to doze off during the trial, with the clerks reportedly having considerable influence over certain trial decisions.
For instance, during questioning, the judge allowed the prosecution to proceed after consulting with the clerk, despite objections from the defense. “My law clerk agrees with you. You can ask questions,” he stated, according to transcripts.
The filing stressed that the employment relationship with Davis Polk raised serious conflict of interest concerns. Jarvis’ attorneys argued that the clerks’ opinions seemed to favor the prosecution in a way that benefited their prospective employer.
They only became aware of this issue post-trial when Davis Polk sent a letter to the court indicating it had conducted an “ethics review” to avoid clerks working on the case.
Jarvis’ lawyers insisted that Davis Polk was not directly involved but noted the firm’s lawyers attended critical hearings and were present throughout the six-week trial.
In a separate civil lawsuit filed in Delaware, JPMorgan is also suing Jarvis. The bank refrained from commenting on the latest filing regarding the trial.
This ongoing legal struggle comes as JPMorgan attempts to cease payments of Jarvis’ legal fees, which have escalated to over $73 million, with an additional $13 million added following his conviction.
Combined with co-defendant Olivier Hamard’s legal expenses, their total exceeds $128 million, nearly three-quarters of the amount JPMorgan paid for Frank.
In another legal document filed in Delaware’s Chancery Court, the bank accused Jarvis and his attorneys of treating advance payments like “blank checks” and claimed charges included personal expenditures like cellulite butter and luxury hotel upgrades.
One attorney allegedly logged 24 hours of work in a single day, a claim that raised eyebrows. A spokesperson for Jarvis, however, denied the accusations, clarifying that the cellulite butter was neither hers nor claimed by her.
