Just did some quick math, and I’d be unable to come up with 83 million dollars!
Alina Habba speaking to the media:
Trump is leading in the polls, and this is happening. Judge decided before the matter began that Trump was liable. No evidence; my experts were denied the chance to testify. She’s [Carroll is] a drug addict, according to a friend. Violation of our justice system.
It would be amusing if one of the first things they took was Truth Social, on the basis that it was a major and ongoing cause of the reputational harm that was litigated.
so - he’s down 1/2 billion alone in NY - assuming the verdict coming back from the fraud case.
Gotta hurt.
She seriously said this? Does she want to be the next up in court facing defamation for false accusations of drug use?
But I bet you wouldn’t have done what Trump did.
No, she’s safe. It’s “according to a friend,” so it’s hearsay.
So I can say “I heard somewhere that you are a nasty pedophile” and I’m in the clear?
But she’s repeating it.
He’s going to have to liquidate a few assets. He’ll end up being the ‘man who sold the world’. That could take anything up to ‘five years’. Maybe he could get a ride from Musk and start a new ‘life on mars’.
Good point - next week a bigger pile will hit the fan and that will be the focus of his gripes during rallies, hopefully allowing Ms. Carroll some respite.
The law of punitive damages is very complicated. In rough terms the United States Supreme Court has said that large punitive awards can violate due process rights, because the defendants are not on notice of what punishment could come from their conduct. They have said the ratio of punitive damages to actual damages cannot (usually) exceed a 9 to 1 ratio. If the actual damages are “significant,” than maybe 4 to 1 or even 1 to 1 is the most that courts should allow. There are factors for the reviewing courts to consider.
What’s the procedure if (when) Trump continues to spread malicious lies about Carroll? Or if Trump’s attorney spreads lies (old ones or new ones) about Carroll?
Do they go back to square one and have a brand new trial on new charges? Or??
Looks like in this case, the punitive damages (65 million) is about 3.5 times the actual damages (18.3 million)
Way too many twitterers are saying what you think they’d be saying. They can’t believe he can do any wrong?!
Isn’t that a pretty standard jury instruction in New York courts?
For mob trials, I mean.
Yeah, that bodes well for Carrol. Under 4:1 is where you want to be. But courts like to take away punitive damages. Given the squishiness of the factors (e.g. “reprehensibility” is one), a reviewing court can pretty much do whatever they want.
Love this remark I spotted on another message board:
“Alina Habba’s performance as a real lawyer made 1Ls roll their eyes.”
For those not in the know, a “1L” is a first-year law student.