Nevada Lawyer Risks Losing Licence Over Behaviour in Ronaldo Case
Summary
The Nevada Supreme Court has imposed a temporary ban on Las Vegas attorney Leslie Mark Stovall and is weighing whether to revoke his law licence over his conduct in the Kathryn Mayorga v. Cristiano Ronaldo matter. The disciplinary action follows findings that Stovall relied on and sought out material first exposed on a European site known for publishing hacked soccer documents, including private communications between Ronaldo and his lawyers. A federal judge dismissed the civil suit in 2022, concluding Stovall had overstepped legal and ethical boundaries. Stovall denies contacting the leaker and maintains he did not use stolen files.
Key Points
- Nevada Supreme Court issued a temporary ban on Stovall and barred him from accepting new clients pending final decision.
- Disciplinary panel recommended revoking Stovall’s licence in 2024, citing intentional misuse of protected communications and a pattern of aggressive tactics.
- Central allegation: Stovall attempted to obtain and used documents first published on a European website that circulated hacked soccer files.
- The federal civil case brought by Kathryn Mayorga against Cristiano Ronaldo was dismissed in 2022 after the court found the main arguments relied on improperly obtained materials.
- Stovall has a history of prior sanctions and suspensions, which the board said weighed in favour of disbarment.
- Ronaldo denies the allegations and his legal team recovered over $330,000 in fees after the case was thrown out.
Content Summary
Leslie Mark Stovall, an attorney admitted in Nevada since the mid-1980s, is facing potentially career-ending discipline tied to his role representing Kathryn Mayorga in allegations that Cristiano Ronaldo assaulted her in 2009. The State Bar alleges Stovall sought out and relied upon hacked documents that were not lawfully obtainable, breaching professional ethics and court rules. A disciplinary panel concluded disbarment was appropriate, noting both the seriousness of the conduct and Stovall’s prior regulatory trouble.
The Nevada Supreme Court has temporarily limited Stovall’s ability to take new clients while allowing him to continue current matters until year-end. The final ruling will determine whether he may continue practising. Stovall denies wrongdoing and has not publicly commented in detail. The outcome will turn on whether the court finds his conduct crossed the line from zealous advocacy into unethical or unlawful behaviour.
Context and Relevance
This case matters beyond the individuals involved because it touches on legal ethics, the admissibility and use of leaked or hacked materials, and how disciplinary bodies respond when high-profile litigation collides with illicitly obtained evidence. For practitioners, regulators and anyone tracking celebrity litigation, the decision could set a precedent on acceptable lines of investigation and the consequences for breaching them. It also reflects wider concerns about cybersecurity, leaked communications and media reporting in major sporting controversies.
Why should I read this?
Short version: a long-serving Nevada lawyer might lose his licence after allegedly using hacked football files in a headline-grabbing Ronaldo case. If you care about legal ethics, how courts treat leaked material, or simply want the gist of a messy, celebrity-driven legal fight without wading through court papers, this saves you the time and gives the punchline.