• 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!

[W: #1262] Trump lawyers to use ‘conflict of interest’ between judge, Carroll’s attorney in appeal of $83.3M jury verdict: ‘Insane’

trixare4kids said:

Trump lawyers to use ‘conflict of interest’ between judge, Carroll’s attorney in appeal of $83.3M jury verdict: ‘Insane’​

By Charles Gasparino

Published Jan. 27, 2024
Updated Jan. 27, 2024, 7:18 p.m. ET

"Donald Trump’s lawyers will use an “insane” and previously unknown “conflict of interest” between E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer and the judge presiding over her defamation case against the former president as the basis of their appeal seeking to toss the eye-popping $83.3 million jury verdict, The Post has learned.

Trump lawyer Alina Habba said she was unaware Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan worked together in the early 1990s at the same powerhouse white-shoe law firm until Saturday, when asked about it by Post columnist Charles Gasparino, who was told by a source that the judge was once Roberta Kaplan’s “mentor.

“It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,” Habba said, insisting neither the 79-year-old judge nor Roberta Kaplan, 57, who aren’t related, disclosed the “conflict of interest” and a violation of judicial ethics rules.

Roberta Kaplan worked at Paul, Weiss Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison in Midtown from 1992 to 2016, before leaving to become a founding partner of Kaplan Hecker & Fink, according to her LinkedIn page.

“This is news to us,” she continued. “We are going to include this in our appeal and take appropriate measures. The fact it wasn’t disclosed is an ethics violation.”

During her early years at Paul Weiss, she worked as associate of the firm at the same time as Judge Kaplan, who was a partner there until 1994 when he was appointed to the federal bench by then-President Bill Clinton."

nypost.com

Exclusive | Trump lawyers to use ‘conflict of interest’ between judge, Carroll’s attorney in appeal of $83.3M jury verdict: ‘Insane’

“It was never disclosed. It’s insane and so incestuous,” Habba said, insisting neither the 79-year-old judge nor Roberta Kaplan, 57, who aren’t related, disclosed the “conflict of inter…
nypost.com nypost.com

E. Jeanne Carroll probably shouldn't be counting her millions yet.
And so, the appeal process has begun and at least one reason cited in the article is that the "good judge" must have for forgotten to mention a conflict of interest and went ahead committed a violation of judicial ethical rules. Justice my ass.
Click to expand...
I love it when conholes gets hopeful
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK, but she will (likely) get paid (by Trump) for the appeal effort, regardless of its outcome. The announcement of an appeal (alone) may get the judge to lower the (very high) punitive damage amount.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works. The punitive damages were not that high. In fact, Trump has not mentioned E. Jean Carroll once since so it worked to get him to stop defaming her (for now).
 
Jay Falcon said:
The word of an admitted ***** grabbrer vs the woman who actually won the trial. There was no affair. Please stop defending the sexual predator.
Click to expand...
He's entitled to a defense because that's how the system works. Even lawyers don't have to believe in the person's innocence to provide a good defense.
 
Overitall said:
He's entitled to a defense because that's how the system works. Even lawyers don't have to believe in the person's innocence to provide a good defense.
Click to expand...
He got his defense. The jury concluded that he sexually assaulted her. Any appeal is not a retrying of the case, it is to address potential flaws in the case. From what I've been reading, the "pretty but not smart" lawyer screwed up his chances at appeal. That is why you see this ridiculous Hail Mary.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Compared to what other case(s)?
Click to expand...
This is not about other cases. The punitive damages ($65M) were not out of line against the other parts of the decision.
 
Slartibartfast said:
If this lawyering thing doesn't work out for her, she would do pretty well as a publicist. She has that whole fake mad bit down pat.
Click to expand...
She did once say in an interview that she'd rather be good looking than smart. That tells the whole story.
 
Airyaman said:
He got his defense. The jury concluded that he sexually assaulted her. Any appeal is not a retrying of the case, it is to address potential flaws in the case. From what I've been reading, the "pretty but not smart" lawyer screwed up his chances at appeal. That is why you see this ridiculous Hail Mary.
Click to expand...
In a civil case the bar is set lower. Add to that equation the demographic of the jury pool and guilt is pretty much a foregone conclusion. Set the trial in a predominantly Republican district and the outcome would most likely be different.
 
Overitall said:
In a civil case the bar is set lower. Add to that equation the demographic of the jury pool and guilt is pretty much a foregone conclusion. Set the trial in a predominantly Republican district and the outcome would most likely be different.
Click to expand...
And? It happened. It's over. Unless they found some flaws or irregularities, there will be no grounds to appeal it.
 
Airyaman said:
This is not about other cases. The punitive damages ($65M) were not out of line against the other parts of the decision.
Click to expand...

In fact the punitive damages were less than x4 the compensatory damages.

WW
 
Overitall said:
In a civil case the bar is set lower. Add to that equation the demographic of the jury pool and guilt is pretty much a foregone conclusion. Set the trial in a predominantly Republican district and the outcome would most likely be different.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if has the foresight to assault her in West Virginia…?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. The initial ask was for $10M, later increased to $12M.
Click to expand...

The initial ask was for compensatory damages with the jury to decide punitive damages. Not all damages.

Compensatory damages came in at 18.3.

WW
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. The initial ask was for $10M, later increased to $12M.
Click to expand...
That was before Trump continue to defame her on a daily basis multiple times per day.

EDIT: Actually, you are wrong.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-...t=Carroll's attorneys asked the jury,him stop"%20defaming%20her%20client.

The jury awarded Carroll $18.3 million in compensatory damages, and $65 million in punitive damages. The compensatory amount included $11 million for repairing her reputation, and $7.3 million for emotional harm.

Carroll's attorneys asked the jury to award $24 million in compensatory damages. The punitive amount, lawyer Roberta Kaplan said, should be enough to "make him stop" defaming her client.
Click to expand...

So they actually got less in compensatory damages than they asked for.
 
Overitall said:
Perhaps if you focused on my point we might enjoy a civil discussion. I'm not holding onto any hope for that.
Click to expand...
You were arguing venue, right?

Right now the constitution has cases happening where the issue occurred.

Why are you offended by this? I mean I could have referenced Utica NY if that is more palatable for you.
 
Overitall said:
Yep. Does it ever make a difference is the question.
Click to expand...
It probably does but that goes to people being less impulsive when they do horrible things (or better, simply not doing them at all, in any venue) instead of it being a political question.

The simple fact is that is where Trump assaulted her so that is where he was tried.

If people dislike that, then they need to advocate for a constitutional amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom