Fogbow

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 4:43 pm Eye-witness report of the attempt to get the gag order/stay of the gag order overturned on Monday (I've cut the cute but irrelevant "Clueless" material)

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-sho ... rcna128117

From the article wrote: At that time, I understood, due to the nature of the relief Trump sought and my analysis of New York court rules, that Trump would be stuck with that gag order through the duration of the trial, including his own testimony.

The reporter apparently did more homework about how the NY court system worked than the counsel for the defense.

They argued no issue could be more important than the ongoing deprivation of the First Amendment rights of their client.

But not important enough to learn the NY court rules and procedures early on so you would be ready to take care of issues that come up, like this one.

We are talking about the speech rights of the former president and the GOP presidential front-runner, he noted,

Too bad, so sad. I don't give a flying f** that he was the president or is a candidate. This is America, where we try, though often fail, to remember that nobody is above the law. No entitlement for you.

Don't like it Donny? Shuffle your a** off to some country who wants an authoritarian deadbeat, or to your friends in Arabia or Russia (though they will drop your sorry butt when you are no longer of any use).

But the thrust of what the court attorney told the parties from the counter of the clerk’s office remained true: Without the consent of the AG’s office and given their own delay,

Jump for me now even though we could not be bothered to learn the rules and file timely.

Kise confidently assured me and other reporters that he has no concern about Trump’s fidelity to the gag order.

HAHAHAHA.

You need to learn about your client as much as you do the court rules and procedures.

Five star post.

bob wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 4:56 pm I hear everybody saying NYS appellate law is arcane. But I'm still surprised there isn't a method to ask for an immediate ruling. Even if it means dismissing the first appeal and starting from scratch.

This New York lawyer is . Pretty much every court I've ever heard of has some kind of method for shortening motion schedules in light of an emergency.

However, most of my practice was in federal court, and I always trod cautiously when unusual procedural issues came up in state court, re-reading the statutes and rules, checking the relevant treatises and statutory commentary, diving a bit into caselaw, and consulting colleagues. I don't have those resources now, and I never had to deal with a problem remotely like this one.

I think what might have happened is this. At the trial level in New York State, the basic tool for urgent relief is the "order to show cause," a way of accelerating a motion (a request for a judicial order), in which you show your papers to the judge before the other side has a chance to see them and respond, and argue (in writing) to the judge why the usual schedule for briefing and arguing a motion should be shortened, sometimes dramatically. And a trial court has pretty much complete discretion, depending on the nature of the emergency, to make the schedule very short indeed, and also to issue stand-still orders pending resolution of the underlying motion.

The order to show cause is a flexible and widely used procedure, and it's understandable why Trump's New York counsel turned to it here, by setting up their papers with a request for a single justice of the Appellate Division to alter the usual schedule. Indeed, it's typical for appellate courts to authorize some preliminary procedural decisions to be made by a single judge, as was done the other week when a single appellate division judge issued a temporary administrative stay of the "gag" orders pending initial review of the papers.

However, some issues on an appeal can only be resolved by the full panel. The quoted article and other posts by reporters mentioned that the present appeal had reached that stage. Possibly a return date had already been set, although I haven't seen it in the docket. Or, maybe the fact that the full panel had made the decision to lift to the administrative stay of the gag order meant the full panel was "seised" of the matter (to use an archaic term). An order to show cause by its nature is directed to a single judge. And appellate panels work at a stately pace. In many appellate courts, some kinds of things are done only once a week.

So what should Trump's lawyers have done? It might have been as simple as addressing the motion to the entire panel, maybe with a separate motion for shortening time (yes, you ought to be able to include the request for shortening time in the main motion, but it's less likely to be overlooked if it's in a separate motion that generates a separate event in the court's database.) Maybe an application to an administrative judge? Or ... ? But I couldn't speculate knowledgeably without doing a deep dive. Even if I had the research resources, it would take time and energy, plus ... "I really don't care, do u?"

It's not the job of the court staff to explain to counsel how a different procedural mechanism might have yielded a different result. Would they have acted differently if the matter had involved an actual life or death matter, a battered spouse, or an urgent need to allow (or prevent) an operation on a gravely ill person, rather than a blowhard's vanity?

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 4:43 pm Eye-witness report of the attempt to get the gag order/stay of the gag order overturned on Monday (I've cut the cute but irrelevant "Clueless" material)

Thanks for the link. I live for the “cute” stuff.

chancery wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 10:28 pm Possibly a return date had already been set, although I haven't seen it in the docket.

I found it. Trump's Article 78 petition challenging the gag orders was commenced in the appellate division on November 15 by a notice of motion. https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef ... 70onzKkQ==

In the motion Trump's lawyers designated December 11 as the return date for the motion. They could have chosen an earlier return date but they chose December 11.

That's an additional reason why the appellate division and its staff would say "baloney" when Trump's lawyers suddenly told them it was super important to have the motion decided sooner, but it doesn't answer the procedural question of what Trump's lawyers should have done to put the request before the court.

They asked for a bench trial. They got it. Then they complain they didn't get a jury trial.

They asked for Dec 11. They got it. Then they complain they can't get an expedited decision.

I'm seeing a pattern. I order a hot dog, get it, take a bite, and then say I ordered a burger, this place is ripping me off. Boo hoo, make a scene, and hope they kick me out so I don't have to pay for the hot dog.

Live updates here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 133a&ei=22

It appears to be going well!

https://twitter.com/lawofruby/status/17 ... 19101?s=20

Lisa Rubin @lawofruby wrote: NEW: A NY appeals court continues the stay of Engoron’s order canceling Trump’s NY business certificates, but DENIES a stay of the other relief granted to the Attorney General after its summary judgment victory on its first claim of pervasive, widespread fraud in financial statements.

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef ... _PLUS_Ig==

What that means practically is that the provisions of the below order are enforceable and that if Judge Jones is the agreed-upon receiver, Trump and his co-defendants owe her a bunch of information and advanced notice about their ownership structure and future activity:

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 12:54 pm It appears to be going well!

Sooner or later, all those hamburders are going to come calling. Sooner works for me.

Alina “Hubba-Hubba” Habba is gonna need her very own topic pretty soon. Gonna have to lawyer up. I listened to “Serious Trouble” (Ken White and Josh Barro) about the allegations against her when she was representing Bedminster and if the allegations are found to be true, she is facing disbarment.

orlylicious and portia: You guys up for another disbarment This one could be even more fun than Eastman.

NewMexGirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 9:21 pm Alina “Hubba-Hubba” Habba is gonna need her very own topic pretty soon. Gonna have to lawyer up. I listened to “Serious Trouble” (Ken White and Josh Barro) about the allegations against her when she was representing Bedminster and if the allegations are found to be true, she is facing disbarment.

orlylicious and portia: You guys up for another disbarment This one could be even more fun than Eastman.

Ooh I love me a good disbarment hearing! Habba's should be lit!

Donald Trump Issues Ominous Warning to New York

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-i ... rk-1850689

"Businesses are watching this case," he told reporters outside the court. "No business will go back into New York, no business will frankly stay in New York, some businesses are talking about leaving New York because of this action, this very serious action," Trump added.

A clip of the former president's statement was shared on X, formerly known as Twitter, by journalist Ron Filipkowski of MeidasTouch, the pro-democracy independent news network.

Nobody listens to Trump anymore. He's a has-been. In fact he's the biggest has-been to come out of New York ever. And there have many people, nobodies, most of them, that came and went from history, and nobody remembers their name. Donald Trump is one of those. I've already forgotten who he is.

Volkonski wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 9:58 am Donald Trump Issues Ominous Warning to New York

[/quote]

Should be: Donald Trump blows more meaningless smoke out his ass

tfg can't testify because there is a gag order. And Habba doesn't appear to understand the role of a witness in a trial.

Acyn @Acyn wrote: Habba on Trump testifying: It’s the best you can do is put this great witness on that is going to stand up and tell you the truth but we asked the judge to lift the gag order… If he sees people whispering and creating a ruckus next to him, he has a right to address it

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f738&ei=16

An accounting expert who came to Donald Trump’s defense in his $250m fraud has racked up nearly $900,000 in fees for his testimony, a court heard on Friday.

New York University Stern School of Business research professor Eli Bartov testified on Thursday that he had found “no evidence here of concealment” in his review of the financial statements at the heart of the case.

On Friday, Bartov was asked about how much he had been paid for his services. Bartov is a leading accountancy expert and it is standard practice in the US legal system for expert witnesses to be paid.

In a deposition taken in July, Bartov disclosed that he was being paid $1,350 an hour to work on the case. In court, he said he had now worked about 650 hours on the case, which would total $877,500.
According to ABC News, the prosecution’s sole expert witness, Michiel McCarty, chairman and chief executive at the investment bank MM Dillon & Co, was paid about $350,000 for his testimony.

Questioned by lawyers for New York’s attorney general, Bartov said the money had come from the Trump Organization and the former president’s political action committee, Save America.

Heard chatter on MSNBC (Lisa Rubin I think) that part of his fee was paid for that America First PAC, or whatever it's called.

It’s fine by me if all of Trump’s pacs pay through the nose for legal expenses. Less money going into his campaign is a good thing.

IANAL, but isn't being paid by the PAC illegal? Hardly campaign expenses.

Apparently, not illegal. tfg's Save America PAC has spent tens of millions on his legal fees. I wouldn't be surprised if they crack $100M on the next round of FEC reporting or so.

NY AG James @NewYorkStateAG wrote: We finished the tenth week of our trial against Donald Trump and the Trump Organization.

Donald Trump can keep trying to distract from reality, but it's the truth that matters, and the truth is on our side.

Brave Donnie runs away, Bravely runs away, away............

Adam Klasfeld
@klasfeldreports@bird.makeup
Trump has backed out and will not be testifying again in his civil fraud trial on Monday, he indicated on Truth Social.

Mercury News :press:
@mercnews@press.coop
Trump says he won’t testify again at his New York fraud trial. He says he has nothing more to say

Donald Trump said Sunday he has decided against testifying for a second time at his New York civil fraud trial, posting on social media that he “VERY SUCCESSFULLY & CONCLUSIVELY” testified last month and saw no need to appear...

Volkonski wrote: ↑Sun Dec 10, 2023 6:05 pm Mercury News :press:
@mercnews@press.coop
Trump says he won’t testify again at his New York fraud trial. He says he has nothing more to say

Donald Trump said Sunday he has decided against testifying for a second time at his New York civil fraud trial, posting on social media that he “VERY SUCCESSFULLY & CONCLUSIVELY” testified last month and saw no need to appear...

The Emperor also noted in the same social media feed that he was, too, clothed in the finest and best silks that anyone who wasn't a total loser could see very clearly and he was not to the contrary at all naked, despite the scurrilous reports of some random child in the audience.