JPMorgan Chase is currently engaged in a legal dispute to discontinue its obligation to fund approximately $115 million in legal fees for Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar, former executives of the startup Frank. The executives were convicted of fraud following JPMorgan’s 2021 acquisition of Frank.

Story Highlights

• JPMorgan Chase is seeking court approval to cease legal payments totaling $115 million for former Frank executives Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar, who were convicted of fraud.
• The bank contends that the legal fees are excessively high, surpassing costs in other significant white-collar defense cases.
• This ongoing dispute underscores potential issues with indemnification agreements and due diligence in corporate acquisitions.
• The court’s decision could establish a notable precedent for future mergers and the handling of fraud within corporate structures.

JPMorgan Challenges Legal Fees for Convicted Executives

JPMorgan Chase has initiated court proceedings to terminate its commitment to cover $115 million in legal expenses for Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar, former executives of Frank. The bank acquired Frank in 2021, and the legal fees are linked to an indemnification clause from that acquisition. Javice and Amar were subsequently convicted of fraud. JPMorgan argues that these legal bills are “abusive” and excessive, reportedly exceeding costs seen in other high-profile cases. The bank is requesting the court to halt further payments and review the legitimacy of these claims.

JPMorgan is stuck paying for Charlie Javice's legal fees. The bank says her $115 million bill is 'patently excessive and egregious' https://t.co/AxTwBEm6bN

— Business Insider (@BusinessInsider) October 25, 2025

Background of the Legal Dispute

The current situation stems from JPMorgan’s 2021 acquisition of Frank, a fintech startup. As part of the acquisition agreement, JPMorgan committed to covering certain legal costs for Frank’s leadership. This clause became a significant liability after it was discovered that Frank’s reported user base of over 4 million had been substantially inflated from under 300,000. Following this discovery, JPMorgan pursued legal action, leading to the convictions of Javice and Amar for fraud. Despite the convictions, the initial agreement, which reportedly lacked sufficient safeguards, continued to obligate JPMorgan to pay these legal fees until the bank’s recent court challenge.

The financial scale of this case has drawn comparisons to the Theranos case, where legal bills reached approximately $30 million. This comparison highlights concerns regarding corporate due diligence and contract drafting, particularly when such agreements may lead to companies subsidizing the defense of individuals convicted of defrauding the company.

Potential Implications for Corporate America

The ongoing legal proceedings in Delaware court are anticipated to have significant implications for American businesses and investors. Should JPMorgan succeed in ending its payment obligations, it could signal that companies have grounds to challenge what they perceive as excessive legal billing and seek relief when indemnification clauses are utilized post-conviction. Conversely, if the court upholds the original agreement, it could potentially influence future demands for legal fees in similar situations. The outcome of this case is being closely observed by corporations, law firms, and the startup sector, as it may influence the structure of future acquisition deals and indemnification clauses.

This dispute is seen by some as a broader discussion about corporate accountability and the need for reforms in how mergers, indemnification, and legal exposure are managed within corporate America.

Watch a report: Charlie Javice convicted of defrauding JPMorgan in $175 million sale of financial aid startup Frank

Sources:

JPMorgan Chase wants out of paying $115M legal tab for convicted fraudsters – WSLS
JPMorgan Chase wants out of paying $115M legal tab for convicted fraudsters – SeattlePI
Apollo’s Marc Rowan praises Frank co-founder despite fraud conviction – AOL
Cofounder of fintech once backed by Steve Cohen convicted of fraud – AOL