While Ms. Carroll has sympathy for any difficulties Mr. Trump may have in securing funds for the bond, these difficulties do not represent a reason to provide relief from the customary requirements for appeal.
No, If you demand Trump to document his wealth, then do you grant a temporary stay to provide him time to make a list? Now you’re playing into Trump’s hand by providing a stalling tactic. That’s bullshit.
Right, and then once he finally submits a Byzantine collection of documents that he claims shows that he has the money available, it’ll have to be audited. So more delays. And then what it he actually can show that he has the liquidity? Let him appeal without putting up the money? That means when he inevitably loses the appeal, she’ll have to come after him instead of just getting it from the escrow account. More delays.
No, you give him a chance to make his case and then you shut him down. All by the book, all perfectly normal.
If he doesn’t want to put the full amount up for the appeal, he can convince a bond company that he’s good for it.
And if I understand correctly, he can still appeal without putting up anything, the only difference is that while the appeal is underway the plaintiff can start the collections process. In other words, the bond or cash in escrow just stops the collections, not the appeal.
So he basically has three more weeks to play tough guy fighting the corrupt syustem until he finally puts up the money for bond. Its just an act for the rubes, when it comes down to protecting his assest he will “find” the bond money and cry some more.
It’s feeling more and more as if he will NOT be able to pony up the $$$ or procure a bond. Not that it was likely at the start, but these motions reek of desperation. “The defendant shouldn’t have to post any bond.” “Okay, how about $100M?”
Since he offered $100M to Leticia James, at least Ms. Carroll can say he apparently has enough for HER bond.
It’s like the lawyers think that the two judges cannot see the other cases.
Sorry - if Trump spreads bullshit in one deposition about how rich he is, it’s makes it harder to plead poverty in another case.
Okay, now I’m curious about this. Obviously, the judges can read/hear the news so they are aware of the others cases, but are they allowed to take judicial notice without one of the parties to their case bringing it forward? I thought they were only supposed to consider the facts as presented in their court/record, not “stuff everybody knows”.
Never mind
(It’s late in the week and I misread, and I’m too tired to correct myself)
If Trump refuses to pay or obstructs collection on the judgment, can he be thrown in jail for contempt of court?
I don’t believe so. He will not be able to “refuse” liens or other collections. His lawyers can try to delay them, but that’s all. Property will be seized and sold. Trump can’t refuse. - it will not legally be his property anymore.
This is not the same as trying to cheat a contractor. He will have to pay up one way or another.
Considering Trumps fraud, I suspect that his properties are mortgaged to the hilt. And may be under water.
Can any of this properties be sold? His 757? His other business jet? The helicopter. The helo is and I suspect all of his ‘possessions’ are so mired in LLC’s that owns another LLC and another and another. It will take years to untangle his house of cards.
Ya can’t get blood money out of a turnip Trump.
So you take possession of the top-level LLC, the one that’s directly owned by Trump. Once you own that, you can take your time in unraveling everything under it. Or you can just sell it to someone else, and let them unravel it.
Of course, you (or the buyer) would have to figure out how to value it which gets back to unraveling (and likely discovering more fraud).
I can’t find the article because Yahoo News doesn’t like to show me the same thing twice but apparently Trump’s appeal is based on the judge not letting him blather on the stand. Yes, that’s right Trump, all you have to do is just keep repeating yourself over and over on this one and eventually everyone will see things from your point of view. Go ahead and tell everyone about E. Jean Carroll again. Make sure you do it in front of a judge and jury, I’m sure that will work out for you.
Habba complained about not being able to put up the defense she wanted to. i.e. Trump thought this was another opportunity to litigate the original case that led to the first $5 million verdict. He was incorrect.
I thought Habba was complaining about inconsistency in the plaintiff’s filing. That is, during the trial they presented evidence that Trump was very wealthy, but now that he doesn’t want to post the full amount of the verdict they say, “Oh, like we’re supposed to just trust him,” implying he doesn’t have the money.
First I think it’s a bit of a stretch to assume doubting his intention to pay must be due to him not affording to be able to pay. More importantly though, if the defense wanted it known that Trump’s not as solvent as he says the time to bring that up was during the trial. He couldn’t do that of course, since the myth that he’s uberwealthy is such a big part of his self-image.
If mortgaged, wouldn’t the mortgages be recorded? I’m not sure recording a mortgage is legally required, but ISTM that not doing so would be imprudent. And if the mortgages are recorded, that should be public information, no?