Fogbow

Reality Check wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 5:43 pm This ruling is not the case that completed trial and judgment in May (Carroll II). This is her original defamation case filed against Trump in 2019 aka, Carroll I. Carroll I got held up in several appeals over whether Trump made the defamatory statements while acting as a government employee. I believe the the DC CoA punted back to district court the issue as to whether the US should be substituted as the defendant in place of Trump. It is interesting that Judge Kaplan has now allowed Carroll to amend her complaint to add statements made by Trump after he was no president any longer. As far as I know the US motion to substitute itself as defendant is still out there.

Foggy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 5:45 pm This is interesting because is there going to be a second trial? How does she prove her case, and how does he defend? Do the amendments require a jury, or just the judge?

This thing is looking like a fustercluck, but I have no experience with anything like this.

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 6:00 pm
I thought the US had withdrawn the motion (but the whole thing is a bit murky)

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Division
Torts Branch, Federal Tort Claims Office Telephone (202) 353-1651
P.O. Box 888 Facsimile (202) 616-5200
Washington, DC 20044
JGT:KLW:CSP:STerrell/DJ# 157-51-6306
June 9, 2023
BY ECF
Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
RE: Carroll v. Trump, No. 1:20-cv-7311-LAK
Dear Judge Kaplan:

As directed by the Order of June 1, 2023 (ECF No. 163), we submit this letter to advise
the Court of the United States’ position as to whether the filing of a new complaint in this action
would render the government’s previous Westfall Act certification ineffective and moot the
government’s motion to substitute itself for Mr. Trump.

Since the government executed the Westfall Act certification, this Court rendered a
decision denying the government’s motion to substitute, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit vacated that decision and remanded the case for further proceedings in light
of the intervening decision by the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia clarifying D.C.’s law of
respondeat superior, plaintiff proposed an amended complaint, and the parties to this case
undertook discovery in parallel proceedings. Given these collective developments, the prior
certification and motion to substitute have been overtaken by events. The Attorney General
should therefore be given the opportunity to decide anew whether to certify that Mr. Trump was
acting within the scope of his office as President at the time of the incidents out of which the
plaintiff’s claim arose, and to do so with respect to the allegations that are set forth in the
operative complaint. And, in light of the numerous potentially relevant developments, it is
unnecessary for this Court to resolve whether the filing of the proposed new complaint, standing
alone, would render the prior certification ineffective.

Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Court afford the United States time after the
Court decides the motion for leave to amend to allow the United States to reach a determination
as to the scope-of-employment question. As set forth in our prior submission, we think the Court
should first resolve plaintiff’s pending motion to amend her complaint and then order the parties
to meet and confer and submit a joint proposed briefing schedule on the issue of substitution 30

New—

E. Jean Carroll's lawyer skewers the "Trump-branded form of magical thinking" behind his request for a new trial.

Read the scathing quote on Trump having "the nerve to claim public vindication" from the jury's verdict.

Story soon,
@LawCrimeNews

Reality Check wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 6:06 pm

BTW, it is disappointing that the Merrick Garland DoJ continued the argument begun by the Barr DoJ that the US should be substituted for Trump as the defendant under the Westfall Act of 1988. I guess it is a case of defending a larger legal principle even though in this particular case it stinks like rotting fish.

WHOA! Joey Tacopina claims his law firm has $5,500,000.00 of Donnie Trump's money in a trust account related to the E. Jean Carroll judgment. Hmmmmm.

Trump sues E Jean Carroll for defamation over rape comments
Former president makes counterclaim, after civil trial found he sexually abused her

Reuters
Wed 28 Jun 2023 05.34 BST

Donald Trump has sued E Jean Carroll for defamation, alleging she falsely accused him of rape after a jury in a civil trial found that he sexually abused her.

Trump’s counterclaim against Carroll in Manhattan federal court on Tuesday cited Carroll’s statements on CNN after the verdict, and comes after a jury’s finding in May that he sexually abused and defamed Carroll, but the jury did not find that he raped her.

Trump is seeking a retraction as well as unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

Carroll’s lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.

The filing by Trump signals that his multi-front legal fight with Carroll is unlikely to end soon as both sides trade accusations and denials in the press.

Carroll, a former Elle magazine advice columnist, amended the first of her two lawsuits against Trump and sought an additional $10m in damages in May, citing his denials during a CNN appearance the day after the verdict.

Trump, who is running to retake the White House in 2024 and has a comfortable lead over his Republican rivals, has denied raping Carroll. He is appealing against the civil verdict, which found he must pay $5m in damages.

Carroll testified that Trump raped her in a New York City department store in the mid-1990’s and then ruined her reputation by calling her a liar when she went public in 2019.

The new filings come in Carroll’s first lawsuit against Trump, which she filed in 2019 for defamation only. The case has been bogged down in appeals over whether Trump was immune from being sued because he had been president when he spoke.




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... r-comments

Greatgrey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2023 3:40 pm


https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65 ... #entry-209

.

Gregg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 5:32 pm This, to this one armed transmission mechanic from Argillite, Kentucky is gross abuse of the courts. It offends me that he can get away with filing garbage like this and his attorneys are such low life garbage that they grabbed tongs and carried it to the clerk to file.

I certainly hope there are sanctions for everyone. this just pisses me off.

Dr. Ken wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 9:50 am

Greatgrey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2023 3:40 pm


https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65 ... #entry-209

.

Jesus I didn't realize he was so close to where I work. I hike in Alpine quite a bit.

Greatgrey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2023 3:40 pm


https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65 ... #entry-209

.

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:44 pm Trust us - Donnie has given us $5.5m to hold onto and then pony up after all the appeals etc...
(Narrator - no he hasn't)

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:48 pm

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:44 pm Trust us - Donnie has given us $5.5m to hold onto and then pony up after all the appeals etc...
(Narrator - no he hasn't)

Actually, he has.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/23/-trump- ... ppeal.html

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:54 pm

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:48 pm

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:44 pm Trust us - Donnie has given us $5.5m to hold onto and then pony up after all the appeals etc...
(Narrator - no he hasn't)

Actually, he has.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/23/-trump- ... ppeal.html

Thanks Sugar!
(yeah.. I realise I just did what you said annoys you.. it wasn't deliberate - just my misunderstanding that should have been framed as speculation)

@lawofruby
CARROLL UPDATE: Trump moved for summary judgment on Carroll's first-filed suit, including on the grounds that he had absolute presidential immunity and that his statements were non-actionable opinion. Finding his arguments "without merit," Judge Lew Kaplan just denied his motion.