Rudy Giuliani

[Slim Cognito]

Rudy just can't get enough being screwed over by people who owe him money.

[neonzx]

[Foggy]

... couldn't even spell incense. these illiterate memes are everywhere.

[sugar magnolia]

... couldn't even spell incense. these illiterate memes are everywhere.

Those little red squiggly underlines are for namby pambys and liberals.

[Volkonski]

Giuliani hearing devolves into chaos as judge signals bankruptcy dismissal

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba ... tcy-judge/

A judge signaled he’ll dismiss Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy after a chaotic hearing Wednesday in which the judge at one point threatened to cut off the ex-New York City mayor’s microphone for interjecting.

Judge Sean Lane said he’d make a final ruling on the complex matter on Friday afternoon.

“I’m leaning toward dismissal, frankly, because I am concerned that the past is prologue,” Lane said.

Though Giuliani in a sudden shift consented to dismissing his bankruptcy mere minutes before the hearing began, he jumped in during the proceeding to push back against his creditors’ accusations he committed bankruptcy crimes.

After several garbled interjections, Lane paused arguments to address the “same cellphone” repeatedly butting in during arguments by a lawyer for Georgia election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman. Giuliani’s bankruptcy was precipitated by a jury’s $148 million verdict against him after he baselessly accused the women of 2020 election fraud.

“Let me ask in court if we can make sure to have that muted, please,” Lane said.

“Your honor, this is Rudolph Giuliani,” the ex-mayor explained.

Speaking over each other, Lane sought to pull Giuliani into line. But Giuliani insisted he should be allowed to push back against the election workers’ lawyer, who had just warned that the ex-mayor’s conduct throughout the bankruptcy could force the judge to “entertain putting America’s mayor in prison.”

“Highly defamatory, your honor!” Giuliani exclaimed.

“So I’m going to ask you to listen to me, and if you don’t, I’m going to have to cut you off,” the judge replied, after which Giuliani remained silent.

Giuliani’s bankruptcy has reached a crossroads after six months of increasing pressure from his creditors, who all accuse the former federal prosecutor of using bankruptcy as a delay tactic while he hides assets and spends egregiously.

[Kendra]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/ ... 78c7&ei=14

Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy hearing devolved into chaos when the former New York City mayor interrupted the court after a lawyer for his creditors said she would consider seeking prison time for his alleged “bankruptcy crimes.”

At the hearing on Wednesday morning, Rachel Strickland, lawyer for the two election workers who Giuliani defamed and now owes $148m, argued in favor of dismissing the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case.

[Dr. Ken]

Yes please do put him in prison for bankruptcy crimes. I could sure use a new avatar of him in pinstripes.

[bob]

“Highly defamatory, your honor!” Giuliani exclaimed.

You would think a competent attorney would know that statements at court proceedings are privileged and can't be defamatory.

Oh, wait....

[keith]

“Highly defamatory, your honor!” Giuliani exclaimed.

You would think a competent attorney would know that statements at court proceedings are privileged and can't be defamatory.

Oh, wait....

IANAL, but even I know what's wrong with your statement.

[Sam the Centipede]

“Highly defamatory, your honor!” Giuliani exclaimed.

You would think a competent attorney would know that statements at court proceedings are privileged and can't be defamatory.

Oh, wait....

Pedantically … isn't the point that statements at court proceedings can be defamatory, but such statements are privileged so there is no legal right to sue? Defamation is the action, whether it is illegal or not is a separable issue.

[Slim Cognito]

Just my arrogant opinion, but I find Giuliani screaming defamation pretty funny after what he did to those two black election workers.

[Sam the Centipede]

Just my arrogant opinion, but I find Giuliani screaming defamation pretty funny after what he did to those two black election workers.

It is, isn't it! I wonder "is it because these creeps have no self-awareness, or is it because they have no shame?"

Then I realise that it's not an either/or question, they tick both boxes.

[bob]

Pedantically … isn't the point that statements at court proceedings can be defamatory, but such statements are privileged so there is no legal right to sue? Defamation is the action, whether it is illegal or not is a separable issue.

Lack of privilege is an element of defamation. A plaintiff must plead and prove there was no privilege.

Statements by attorneys in court proceedings have absolute privilege.

Something one would expect a lawyer who was sued for defamation to know. (Even a defrocked one.)

[chancery]

Hmm, that reminds me. The absolute litigation privilege for statements by attorneys (as well as by parties and witnesses) made in court proceedings was covered in my first year torts class.

After going over the rule (there may have been a case to discuss), the eminent Professor Willis Reese (an authority on conflicts of laws and a memorable teacher), asked us to consider a lawyer or a witness who digressed from the matter at hand by sharing some thoughts about his neighbor "Joe Blow," adverting perhaps to his loathsome diseases or his unnatural sexual practices. Privileged or not?

And thus we learned the caveat that the litigation privilege only applies to statements relevant to the proceeding. The bounds of relevance are drawn quite liberally, however, and the accusations made during the hearing by the lawyers for the two election workers were clearly privileged.

But although it's improper and showboaty, it's not necessarily bad advocacy to interrupt and denounce an opponent's accusations, even if they are privileged, although Giuliani might done better to call them "unprofessional," "shameful" or "disgraceful" rather than using a term with a distracting technical meaning. It's a high-risk tactic, and to pull it off you need to have exquisite skills, judgment, and timing, as well as unquestioned stature as a member of the court's bar. It only works if focussing the judge's attention on your adversary's remarks causes the judge to think less of the adversary.

Needless to say, Giuliani's stunt didn't work at all.

Just my arrogant opinion, but I find Giuliani screaming defamation pretty funny after what he did to those two black election workers.

It is, isn't it! I wonder "is it because these creeps have no self-awareness, or is it because they have no shame?"

Then I realise that it's not an either/or question, they tick both boxes.

Yes indeed.

[realist]

Thanks, chancery.

[sad-cafe]

what does dismissing it mean?

that he has to pay everyone?

[bob]

what does dismissing it mean?

that he has to pay everyone?

Generally speaking, bankruptcy proceedings put a pause on judgment enforcement.

But if the bankruptcy case is dismissed, it is more of a free-for-all. Creditors haul Giuliani into a court to demand to know what his assets are, where they are, etc. And, once that is known, employ the usual legal methods to get them. And then it is a race to get an asset before some other creditor does.

Too also: I presume this is a voluntary bankruptcy (i.e., Giuliani filed it). It is possible it may be converted into an involuntary proceedings, or dismissed so an involuntary proceeding can happen. Then the liquidation of his assets would happen in the bankruptcy court.

Given Giuliani owes more than he has, the creditors in reality will be deciding how much of a discount they're willing to accept for certainty, e.g., fight to get a certain percentage, or settle for (but actually receive) a smaller percentage, say, 10 cents for every dollar owed.

[sad-cafe]

wow

Thank you

[MN-Skeptic]

Decision coming today -

Ava-joye
@Avajoye

Just In: 1pm hearing regarding Giuliani's bankruptcy case in NY has been canceled.

Instead of ruling from the bench, Judge Sean Lane is now expected to issue a written decision that will be uploaded online (to the docket). @ScrippsNews

[bob]

Both of these motions are essentially asking for the same thing: Appoint a trustee to take control of Giuliani's (non-exempt) assets, and then sell/distribute them to his ("official") creditors.

Giuliani could delay by not cooperating with the trustee ... at his peril.

A Chapter 11 bankruptcy usually involves reorganizing and a payment plan. Whereas Chapter 7 is a liquidation fire sale.

[bob]

A longer, better explainer:

Executive summary: Because the two Georgian election workers have a judgment against Giuliani, it is to their advantage to dismiss the bankruptcy case. Because they can immediately try to enforce their judgment. In other words, they're at the front of the pack.

Giuliani has decided he also wants this (because it gives him the opportunity to hide his remaining assets).

Whereas Giuliani's other creditors want a trustee put in place, so they all can try to get their pieces of the pie from the trustee.

[realist]

Bankruptcy case dismissed.

The decision followed months of missed deadlines by Giuliani, who evaded questions about his finances.

“The record in this case reflects Mr. Giuliani’s continued failure to meet his reporting obligations and provide the financial transparency required of a debtor in possession,” the decision said. “The lack of financial transparency is particularly troubling given concerns that Mr. Giuliani has engaged in self-dealing and that he has potential conflicts of interest that would hamper the administration of his bankruptcy case.”

https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-dismiss ... =111892518

[p0rtia]

[Frater I*I]

And Rudy is still getting punched in the dick....

[W. Kevin Vicklund]