And Trumps seminars had an A rating until the lawsuit. Then they solicited former "students" and they knocked it down to a D cuz all of a sudden they got 23 complaints??
Trump filed a suit against her saying she was malicious. The court found that she was NOT malicious in her suit and her lawyer did very well in the settlement. Well, she was. Now she wants to opt out...probably because she had made a video praising the seminars....before her suit.
The whole thing is a "sue the deep pockets" example.
“The whole thing is a “sue the deep pockets” example.”
She’s doing pretty good for herself if she’s living in Irvine. Wonder what kind of “damage” she is claiming was done to her.
Not sure what happened in the suit, but under the law, malicious prosecution based on a civil lawsuit requires that the civil suit have concluded in a final judgment in which the defendant was completely vindicated. (Also, that there was no probable cause for bringing the suit and that the plaintiff was motivated by "malice".) I have not read anywhere that the case against Trump University has ever proceeded to trial and final judgment (i.e., judgment entered after all appeals are exhausted). So I don't know why Trump's lawyers would have filed an action for malicious prosecution, and if they did, I can see why it was dismissed in the pleading stage or at summary judgment. If such a cross-complaint were filed without meeting the requirements, I could see a judge awarding costs and maybe even fees to the other side.
Is that what happened here? If so, it has no bearing on anything related to what remains of the original case.