• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’

HumblePi

HumblePi

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
29,096
Reaction score
22,696
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
 
Of course this was never a serious lawsuit. This is just more political theater by our immature egotistical man-child. He doesn't care how he embarrasses this country or how much money he wastes the legal system. It's all about Trump
 
ncguy said:
Of course this was never a serious lawsuit. This is just more political theater by our immature egotistical man-child. He doesn't care how he embarrasses this country or how much money he wastes the legal system. It's all about Trump
Click to expand...
Get Alina Habba to help! She knows how to royally tick off a judge.
 
lol... So embarrassing.

Sadly, even getting metaphorically bitch-slapped by the NYT and a (Bush 41 appointed) Florida judge will not stop Dear Leader from filing more frivolous lawsuits like this. :rolleyes:
 
HumblePi said:

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...
It will happen again.
 
HumblePi said:

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...

So, what actually happened, is he did not reject the lawsuit at all. But chose a technicality over not liking how the complaint was written.
 
iamwhatiseem said:
So, what actually happened, is he did not reject the lawsuit at all. But chose a technicality over not liking how the complaint was written.
Click to expand...
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
iamwhatiseem said:
a technicality
Click to expand...
 
iamwhatiseem said:
So, what actually happened, is he did not reject the lawsuit at all. But chose a technicality over not liking how the complaint was written.
Click to expand...
It was written so poorly and so against filing rules that there was no need to do anything else but just rejected initially. It wasn't that he didn't like how it was written. It was cuz it violated rules. Did you even read the article?
 
HumblePi said:
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Unless civil practice has changed wildly since law school, you can't sue someone for filing a frivolous suit against you. Depending on circumstances, you can move for sanctions. Judge can also impose them unilaterally.
 
HumblePi said:

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...
If Americans don't care about corruption or autocracy, I'd at least think they would want a competent corrupt dictator.

This incompetent President leads a cadre of incom[petent followers.
 
ncguy said:
It was written so poorly and so against filing rules that there was no need to do anything else but just rejected initially. It wasn't that he didn't like how it was written. It was cuz it violated rules. Did you even read the article?
Click to expand...
Yes I did.
He did not reject the lawsuit as the title says - he rejected their initial complaint article for being too long and overly detailed.
Which is a technicality that it therefore breaks rules.
I would love to know if long articles have happened before and the same judge said nothing. I suspect this is true.
It is a NY judge afterall.
 
iamwhatiseem said:
Yes I did.
He did not reject the lawsuit as the title says - he rejected their initial complaint article for being too long and overly detailed.
Which is a technicality that it therefore breaks rules.
I would love to know if long articles have happened before and the same judge said nothing. I suspect this is true.
It is a NY judge afterall.
Click to expand...
The judgment was much more critical than that. Did you read it or just take talking points from Fox
 
HumblePi said:

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Courts need to start imposing financial sanctions in these cases.
 
iamwhatiseem said:
Yes I did.
He did not reject the lawsuit as the title says - he rejected their initial complaint article for being too long and overly detailed.
Which is a technicality that it therefore breaks rules.
I would love to know if long articles have happened before and the same judge said nothing. I suspect this is true.
It is a NY judge afterall.
Click to expand...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...dge-trump-lawsuit-new-york-times/86241281007/
Merryday, who was appointed by President George H. W. Bush, said the complaint contains eighty pages of repetitive claims and praise for President Trump, but fails to establish the two counts of defamation alleged. He lambasted Trump's lawyers for forcing him to "labor through" the "superfluous" praise about Trump's show "The Apprentice," as well as the size of his real estate empire and the "historic fashion" of Trump's 2024 presidential victory.🤣

"Even assuming that each allegation in the complaint is true ... a complaint remains an improper and impermissible place for the tedious and burdensome aggregation of prospective evidence, for the rehearsal of tendentious arguments, or for the protracted recitation and explanation of legal authority putatively supporting the pleader's claim for relief," the judge wrote. "As every lawyer knows (or is presumed to know), a complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective -- not a protected platform to rage against an adversary." :ROFLMAO:

*vituperation
bitter and abusive language

*invective
insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.
 
HumblePi said:

Judge rejects Trump’s New York Times lawsuit for being ‘decidedly improper and impermissible’​

https://www.fox13now.com/news/natio...or-being-decidedly-improper-and-impermissible
In a ruling dripping with derision, a federal judge has rejected President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, asserting that the rambling 85-page suit did not follow federal rules for filing civil complaints.

The president’s team has been given a month to refile, and a Trump spokesperson indicated that they will do so.

Judge Steven D. Merryday of the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida said Friday that the suit “stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

A complaint must be a “short, plain, direct statement of allegations of fact,” he wrote, and Trump’s broadside against The Times was “decidedly improper and impermissible.”

Merryday said Trump’s legal team can refile in the next four weeks, but must keep the complaint to 40 pages or fewer.

A complaint is not supposed to be “a public forum for vituperation and invective” or “a megaphone for public relations,” he said.
____________________________________________________
The NYT should file a counter-suit against Trump for this frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...

DJT didn’t want to pay the legal fees for a competent attorney?

Cut-Rate Lawyers R Us, LLC
 
www.cbsnews.com

Federal judge tosses Trump's lawsuit against New York Times, calls complaint "decidedly improper and impermissible"

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out President Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, citing its excessive length, but gave his attorneys a chance to refile.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com

Updated on: September 19, 2025 / 5:59 PM EDT / CBS News

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out President Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, citing its excessive length, but giving his attorneys a chance to file a shorter, amended version of the complaint within a month.

In the ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Steven Merryday said the original 85-page complaint was "decidedly improper and impermissible" and went well beyond Rule 8 of federal rules of civil procedure, which requires that each allegation be "simple, concise and direct."

Merryday, a George H.W. Bush nominee, criticized the complaint's "abundant, florid, and enervating detail," including superfluous references to "The Apprentice," Mr. Trump's many properties and media appearances, and an account of what the president calls "the Russia Collusion Hoax." For a two-count complaint, Merryday said the first 79 pages of the 85-page filing are unnecessarily long.

The president sued The New York Times and four of its reporters earlier this week over their extensive coverage of his business career, campaign and administration, asking for $15 billion.

The president and his attorneys have 28 days to amend the complaint, with the judge giving Mr. Trump's attorneys a 40-page limit....

```````````````````````````````````

Does trump hire incompetent attorneys?
 
Pyrite said:
www.cbsnews.com

Federal judge tosses Trump's lawsuit against New York Times, calls complaint "decidedly improper and impermissible"

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out President Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, citing its excessive length, but gave his attorneys a chance to refile.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com

Updated on: September 19, 2025 / 5:59 PM EDT / CBS News

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out President Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, citing its excessive length, but giving his attorneys a chance to file a shorter, amended version of the complaint within a month.

In the ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Steven Merryday said the original 85-page complaint was "decidedly improper and impermissible" and went well beyond Rule 8 of federal rules of civil procedure, which requires that each allegation be "simple, concise and direct."

Merryday, a George H.W. Bush nominee, criticized the complaint's "abundant, florid, and enervating detail," including superfluous references to "The Apprentice," Mr. Trump's many properties and media appearances, and an account of what the president calls "the Russia Collusion Hoax." For a two-count complaint, Merryday said the first 79 pages of the 85-page filing are unnecessarily long.

The president sued The New York Times and four of its reporters earlier this week over their extensive coverage of his business career, campaign and administration, asking for $15 billion.

The president and his attorneys have 28 days to amend the complaint, with the judge giving Mr. Trump's attorneys a 40-page limit....

```````````````````````````````````

Does trump hire incompetent attorneys?
Click to expand...
He hires attorneys who guarantee they will do whatever he wants, ethical or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom