Court filings this week indicate attorneys haven’t reached agreement on confidentiality of financial records in the Arkansas paternity case against Hunter Biden, son of the former vice president and current presidential candidate.

A recent court filing indicated DNA testing had established that Biden was the father of the child of a Batesville woman seeking support payments, Lunden Alexis Roberts. Biden met Roberts when she worked in Washington, D.C. Roberts’ lawyers have asked for an order declaring paternity and for an order protecting the privacy of the child. A hearing is set in the case Monday in circuit court in Independence County.

Wednesday of this week, Biden’s attorney, Bart Calhoun of Little Rock, filed a motion asking for a delay of Monday’s hearing.  It notes the case has been highly publicized and, “in the interest of justice,” a protective order on financial information is necessary. He wrote:

The likelihood that defendant’s private financial records will be used in an inappropriate and malicious manner for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with these proceedings is exceedingly high and should not be tolerated by this court.

Biden has been in the news for his work for a Ukraine gas company. That work has been used as a diversion by Donald Trump and his supporters in the ongoing impeachment inquiry. Biden’s financial circumstances thus are of interest beyond the borders of Independence County, Arkansas, where the paternity case is being heard.

Advertisement

Calhoun’s motion said the defendant’s attorney, Clint Lancaster of Benton, agrees to the need for a protective order, but they have been unable so far to agree on precise terms. Calhoun also said Biden will not be able to complete his affidavit of financial means in time for the Dec. 2 hearing, which will be on the subject of temporary child support payments. Biden submitted an affidavit that said he was unable to complete the financial statement because of “a lack of complete information necessary to do so.” He said he was currently unemployed and had had no monthly income since May 2019. He also said:

“I currently have significant debts (in part as a result of obligations arising from my divorce which was final in April 2017) that are being calculated by accountants whom I have directed to provide the information necessary to complete the affidavit of financial means so it can be provided to this court as soon as possible subject to a protective order.”

Calhoun’s motion was accompanied by a brief including a suggested protective order.  It would treat all financial information as confidential and bind all who viewed the information. Furthermore, attorneys would be notified of any attempt of other court actions to seek the information.