Judge needs to hear more before ruling in money dispute between Alec Bohm and his parents

Alec Bohm’s legal fight against his parents over millions of dollars the Philadelphia Phillies third baseman alleges they defrauded him of will continue into the fall after a judge declined to rule on his request for injunction.

Common Court Pleas Judge Michael E. Erdos said he needed to hear evidence before ruling on Bohm’s requests to pause arbitration proceedings that are ongoing in Florida and freeze $528,618 that his parents transferred into their attorney’s trust account.

The former All-Star, who is with the Phillies on a West Coast trip, was not in the City Hall courtroom Thursday afternoon for the hearing.

Attorneys for Bohm clashed with representatives of his parents, Lisa and Daniel Bohm, over whether Philadelphia was the right venue for the litigation.

“I would argue that he didn’t feel harm anywhere,” said Siobhan Cole, a Holland & Knight attorney representing the elder Bohms, “but to the extent that there is harm, he didn’t feel it on the field in Philadelphia, but in his bank accounts in Florida.”

Anthony Twardowski, a Zarwin Baum attorney representing Alec Bohm, said the parents inappropriately transferred funds from Bohm’s account while he was playing on the field at Citizens Bank Park.

Twardowski also urged the judge to stay an arbitration proceeding concerning the validity of an operating agreement between Bohm and his parents, which the baseball player says he was tricked into. Arbitration decisions are generally not reviewable by judges unless there was abuse in the process, the attorney said, so allowing the proceeding in Florida to continue could be detrimental to Bohm.

“Alec Bohm’s rights deserve protection,” Twardowski said. “The worst thing that the defendants are going to suffer is delay.”

The majority of the hearing surrounded minute legal details about jurisdiction and the type of fraud that Bohm alleges his parents committed — specifically if the fraud was in entering the contract, or in the execution of the contract.

“The distinction is a bit vexing even for people who went to law school,” Erdos said.

The judge concluded Thursday’s hearing saying he needed more evidence, and ordered the parties to gather information ahead of a September hearing. Erdos hinted that he leaned toward finding the case can proceed in a Pennsylvania court, but that Bohm’s only harm is financial. Any harm that can be compensated through monetary damages is generally considered not “irreparable,” which is the standard for an injunction.

As for the money the parents transferred, Erdos said he doesn’t believe they would spend it or disappear.

“I don’t suspect the money is going anywhere,” the judge said.

Thursday’s hearing marked the latest major public step in Bohm’s case, which the player filed in March alleging that his parents defrauded him of millions of dollars under the guise of managing his financial affairs.

In the lawsuit, Bohm says his parents used several limited liability companies to funnel money from his personal financial accounts that they later “converted to their own use.” The suit seeks a judgement of at least $3 million, as well as an accounting of the funds in question, among other relief.

Bohm later filed a preliminary injunction request to prevent his parents from using the more than $500,000 he says they took from him to pay for anticipated legal expenses. Bohm’s parents have since denied wrongdoing, and said through their attorneys that they transferred the money into their attorney’s account for safekeeping, and so funds would be available to cover expenses for Bohm’s LLCs and real estate properties.

Cole, the attorney for Bohm’s parents, told The Inquirer last month that the couple has “always tried to protect their son and his assets.” The player’s claims, she added, are “misguided and unfounded,” and his parents remain committed to “restoring their relationship” with their son.