Posted on 01/27/2024 6:30:43 PM PST by Libloather
Donald Trump's lawyers intend to appeal his staggering $83.3 million defamation lawsuit loss to E. Jean Carroll by arguing there was an 'insane' conflict of interest at the heart of the case.
The former president's legal team are set to appeal on the grounds there was a conflict of interest between Carroll's lawyer and the judge presiding over her case.
Trump's firebrand attorney Alina Habba claimed she was unaware that Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll's lawyer Roberta Kaplan - who are not related - worked together in the early 1990s, with the judge serving as her 'mentor', reports the New York Post.
'It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,' Habba said, arguing their alleged close relationship was never disclosed and she only became aware of it after the conclusion of the case.
Habba continued: 'This is news to us. We are going to include this in our appeal and take appropriate measures. The fact it wasn't disclosed is an ethics violation.'
The allegations of a conflict of interest were bolstered by an anonymous former Weiss partner, who reportedly claimed Roberta Kaplan - a junior associate - made an extra effort to stand out to the managing partners.
'Lew was like her mentor,' they claimed.
Before becoming a founding partner at law firm Kaplan, Keckler & Fink in 2016, Roberta Kaplan worked alongside the judge at Paul, Weiss Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison in Manhattan.
She began at the firm in 1992, according to her LinkedIn, where Judge Kaplan was a partner until he was appointed to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton in 1994.
In a statement to the Post, representative for Roberta Kaplan, Zak Sawyer, denied there was any conflict of interest and said the two barely knew each other.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I bet the judge tries to jail PDJT for contempt, even though the trial’s over.
So Carroll’s claims from 30 years ago aren’t worthwhile, but we’re supposed to care that the judge and attorney worked together 30 years ago?
There is a separation of time as I recollect.
Having worked for the same law firm means nearly zilch. Some of these law firms are huge.
You seem to be triggered!
There is a problem that Justice Kavanaugh denied Ford’s allegation and he might have to recuse himself.
That would make the Supreme Court likely to decide 4-4, leaving Trump to write a big check.
Only Congress can alter the tax code to tax the income and then hand it back to Trump.
The federal tax code might be made to require all judgements against current and former constitutional officers be taxed at 100%.
The Congress might tax all punitive damage award amounts at 100%.
“So Carroll’s claims from 30 years ago aren’t worthwhile”
All she had to do was to see a lawyer in NYC. There are plenty of female lawyers in NYC who would have been glad to help her (and to get ~40% of a settlement from a billionaire).
If I could be locked up based on my contempt for the America legal system you would not read another comment from me.
Even the WEF people admit there is a “trust” problem.
Yup. Ruh row.
they’ve got so many avenues of appeal. check this out https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/crazy-e-jean-carroll-accused-several-men-sexual/
mean anything ? who knows.
God bless our President who fights!
Not a legal expert but the verdict was given by a jury, not judge.
What about freedom of speech? She made a public accusation of criminal behavior by Trump. He vehemently denied the accusation. How can his denial be any more harmful to her than her accusation to him? How can his denial be anything but a constitutionally protected exercise of free speech?
The New York State Constitution offers broader free speech protection than the US Constitution. It states ““Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.”
It’s not the two worked together it’s the failure to disclose.
p
You obviously know little to nothing bout how the law and how courts work, they failed to disclose their connection, one that was procedurally required to be declared, this is a blatant legal ethics violation, one the typically would result in a mistrial or dismissal.
Lawyers are required to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, to fail to disclose this is an active deception, one they are fully aware was wrong. It really is a big deal.
However Judge Kaplan would not allow President Trump to defend himself, and would not introduce into evidence many sexual assault allegations made by Jean Carroll against other men. He ignored the fact Jean Carroll deleted evidence she was instructed and agreed to preserve.
IMO the fix was in between the anti-Trump Judge, the big money donor to Nicki Haley and the funder of the Jean Carroll lawsuits, Reid Hoffman, and the lawyers for Jean (rape is sexy) Carroll.
This amounts to both an ex post facto law and possibly a Bill of Attainder since it is generally acknowledged that it was passed by political opponents of Donald Trump for the specific purpose of allowing Carroll to sue him
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.