• 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...
Doesn't Carroll have a book out regarding the accusations? I imagine if she does, the notoriety of this matter probably boosted its sales. She is bound to capitalize on this even without one penny coming directly from him.
 
.
Dear FPOTUS#45,

Hiring a lawyer for $2.5 million who costs you $88.3 Million in punitive damages is not a smart business move.

Remember next time, hire lawyers for their brains and who understand Evidence 101, not their bra size.

Just say'n.

WW
.
 
Overitall said:
Doesn't Carroll have a book out regarding the accusations? I imagine if she does, the notoriety of this matter probably boosted its sales. She is bound to capitalize on this even without one penny coming directly from him.
Click to expand...

With $88.3 Million in the pipeline, she doesn't have to worry about book sales.

WW
 
Overitall said:
Doesn't Carroll have a book out regarding the accusations? I imagine if she does, the notoriety of this matter probably boosted its sales. She is bound to capitalize on this even without one penny coming directly from him.
Click to expand...
The only had to have her live totally upended to get to that point too!
 
NuffSaid said:
I heard that both the judge and Carroll’s lawyer went to law school. This should be enough for grounds for dismissal.
Click to expand...
Lol
 
Overitall said:
Not a clue about what you're talking about. You think she didn't try to profit off a famous man?
Click to expand...
I think she is seeking compensation for what happened to her, including losing her career and aspects of her personal life after she was sexually assaulted by Trump. I wouldn't classify that is profit, but as restitution.

Unfortunately, Trump didn't learn the lesson he needed to learn the first time around, so now its costing him more. I also suspect there will be a third lawsuit at some point due to Trump's lack of self control.

To answer your question specifically, no, based on the reasons I have laid out.
 
Slartibartfast said:
I think she is seeking compensation for what happened to her, including losing her career after she was assaulted by Trump. I wouldn't classify that is profit, but as restitution.

To answer your question specifically, no.
Click to expand...
She wrote about the alleged affair, for something other than profiting personally from it; like what? I'm not buying any "Me too!" nonsense.
 
Overitall said:
She wrote about the alleged affair, for something other than profiting personally from it; like what? I'm not buying any "Me too!" nonsense.
Click to expand...
In what world is being sexually assaulted in a dressing room an "alleged affair"?
 
Overitall said:
Appeals! She and Trump might both be dead before this works its way through the courts.
Click to expand...

#1 Appeals can only happen if he pays the bond in advance. #2 Appeals have to be based on an appealable error by the court. Appeals are not a "hey I didn't like the verdict". #3 FPOTUS#45 record with appellate courts - sucks.

In which case her heirs will get the money if she passes.

In which case his estate will pay the money if he passes.

WW
 
She might get about half of the 83 in about 3-4 years from now. Maybe
 
WorldWatcher said:
#1 Appeals can only happen if he pays the bond in advance. #2 Appeals have to be based on an appealable error by the court. Appeals are not a "hey I didn't like the verdict". #3 FPOTUS#45 record with appellate courts - sucks.

In which case her heirs will get the money if she passes.

In which case his estate will pay the money if he passes.

WW
Click to expand...
Trump already stated he plans on appealing. Until that has ran its course Carroll gets nothing.
 
WorldWatcher said:
Except she had witnesses testify regarding contemporaneous communications at the time. So it's more Her Word + Other Word + Other Word (the others giving weight to her word) against his word.

WW
Click to expand...
So, let me get this straight. If I tell someone that you hit me and they testify in court about what they were told that makes the allegations true?
 
Overitall said:
Trump already stated he plans on appealing. Until that has ran its course Carroll gets nothing.
Click to expand...

Correct. However he still has to pay into the performance before he can appeal.

WW
 
This going nowhere fast.......but have at it!
 
Overitall said:
So, let me get this straight. If I tell someone that you hit me and they testify in court about what they were told that makes the allegations true?
Click to expand...

Of course not, that would be a hearsay testimony as to the assault.

However the testimony was not about the attack itself, the testimony presented went to contemporaneous communications made shortly after the attack.
.
.
.
Such testimony is allowed as it went to the credibility of the other witness testimony (in this case Ms. Carroll) and the jury ** IS ** allowed to weight the credibility of witnesses. The fact that FPOTUS#45 didn't take the stand and in fact didn't even present a defense in the initial Trial of Fact did not help his case. But once that case was decided, he didn't get to relitigate it in the Trail(s) for Damages. And by not presenting a defense he pretty much screwed himself on appealing the Trail of Fact.

WW
 
Last edited:
Overitall said:
Her word against his, type of world.
Click to expand...
Might have worked if he bothered testyfying to his " truth" . However, he chose not to even show in court. Choices have consequences and Trump has made some very bad choices that landed him in all this hot water.
 
Overitall said:
Her word against his, type of world.
Click to expand...
That’s an “affair”? I don’t think she was married at the time.

I guess you can say Trump had an affair since he was married at the time though.

It’s a really weird way to use that word.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom