Those are two separate and very different things. He could sue his lawyers for malpractice, but that wouldn’t do anything about the trial results. Separately, he can appeal, but it’s unlikely to be successful because the facts of the case are so thoroughly against him. He would have to be able to show that his incompetent representation caused his loss instead of the facts of the case being against him. Otherwise defendents would look for the worst legal counsel instead of paying for the best legal counsel they can afford.
ETA: @danimagoo has a better analysis. I really should read all the way through a thread before posting. Sometimes my thumbs just get too impatient!
I kinda do as well, but only because I wouldn’t wish that father on my worst enemy. Mel has ensured a gold-plated future for the pair of them but, by Dog, that kid has seen some stuff. The pic below is blurred because of the very definition of trauma etched on the lanky kid’s face, and the fact it’s chock-full of drumpfs.
Holy heck, Trump just decided to use his lunch break to smack-talk the judge to the press before heading back into the courtroom for this afternoon’s testimony. That ought to go over well.
“We are wasting our time with this trial with a Democrat judge from the clubhouses; it’s a disgrace,” Trump said. “They ought to look for the murderers and the killers that are all over New York, killing people.”
Interesting. The law allows the New York AG to seek an “order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper.”
Having not researched the case or the specific statute, but having experience with equitable vs. legal remedies, my initial thought is that he’s not entitled to a jury regarding the equitable remedies (injunction, canceled certificates, independent monitor, etc., and disgorgement of profits). He might have been entitled to a jury, had he checked the box, at least on the issue of “damages” (if that is even an issue in the case). I don’t what that would mean in practice, had they actually requested a jury.
“Ms. Trump’s rental agreement for Penthouse A in Trump Park Avenue included an option to purchase the unit for $8,500,000. But in the 2011 and 2012 Statements of Financial Condition, this unit was valued at $20,820,000—approximately two and a half times as much as the option price, with no disclosure of the existence of the option,” the lawsuit says. -CNN
