Judge Orders Trump and Lawyer to Pay Nearly $1 Million in sanctions for filing frivolous lawsuit
Jan 20, 2023 06:27:58 #
New York Times
By Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman
Jan. 19, 2023Judge Orders Trump and Lawyer to Pay Nearly $1 Million for Bogus Suit
In a scathing ruling, a federal judge in Florida on Thursday ordered Donald J. Trump and one of his lawyers together to pay nearly a million dollars in sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit against nearly three dozen of Mr. Trump’s perceived political enemies, including Hillary Clinton and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey.
“This case should never have been brought,” U.S. District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks wrote in a 46-page ruling. “Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start. No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim.”
“Mr. Trump is a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries,” Judge Middlebrooks wrote. “He is the mastermind of strategic abuse of the judicial process, and he cannot be seen as a litigant blindly following the advice of a lawyer. He knew full well the impact of his actions.”
Judge Middlebrooks said Mr. Trump’s suit had been “brought in bad faith for an improper purpose” and had “needlessly harmed” the 31 individuals and organizations, including the Democratic National Committee, he had sued “in order to dishonestly advance a political narrative.” The judge added that Mr. Trump’s use of the courts had helped to undermine the public’s confidence in them.
“A continuing pattern of misuse of the courts by Mr. Trump and his lawyers undermines the rule of law, portrays judges as partisans and diverts resources from those who have suffered actual legal harm,” he wrote.
The judge said Mr. Trump and the lawyer who filed the case for him, Alina Habba, and her firm, Habba Madaio & Associates, were to pay $937,989.39.
The suit names Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and other people and entities that he claimed conspired to damage him in the 2016 e******n with what he called false claims about his ties to Russia. Among the defendants were Mr. Comey; the former deputy F.B.I. director Andrew G. McCabe, who opened the counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia; and the former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who helped circulate a dossier of lurid claims about Mr. Trump and Russia, many of which were unsubstantiated.
The conspiracy-minded racketeering suit was filed with hyperbole and exaggerations, and made claims easily shown to be false. In the ruling on Thursday, Judge Middlebrooks broke down how the suit’s claims — including that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Comey had conspired to take down Mr. Trump — were “implausible” and “categorically absurd.”
Mr. Trump’s claims were “a hodgepodge of disconnected, often immaterial events, followed by an implausible conclusion,” the judge wrote, adding, “This is a deliberate attempt to harass; to tell a story without regard to facts.”
Judge Middlebrooks, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton in 1997, threw out the suit in September, saying that “most of plaintiff’s claims are not only unsupported by any legal authority but plainly foreclosed by binding precedent.” The judge said that what the suit “lacks in substance and legal support, it seeks to substitute with length, hyperbole, and the settling of scores and grievances.”
He said Mr. Trump was trying to brandish a “political manifesto” against political rivals, masquerading as a lawsuit.
In November, Judge Middlebrooks fined Mr. Trump’s lawyers $50,000 and ordered them to pay the legal fees of one of the defendants. But a number of defendants, including Mrs. Clinton, filed jointly seeking additional sanctions, which the judge wrote at the time “may be appropriate.” The actions of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, he warned then, could also merit attention from “the bar and disciplinary authorities.”
By Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman
Jan. 19, 2023Judge Orders Trump and Lawyer to Pay Nearly $1 Million for Bogus Suit
In a scathing ruling, a federal judge in Florida on Thursday ordered Donald J. Trump and one of his lawyers together to pay nearly a million dollars in sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit against nearly three dozen of Mr. Trump’s perceived political enemies, including Hillary Clinton and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey.
“This case should never have been brought,” U.S. District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks wrote in a 46-page ruling. “Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start. No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim.”
“Mr. Trump is a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries,” Judge Middlebrooks wrote. “He is the mastermind of strategic abuse of the judicial process, and he cannot be seen as a litigant blindly following the advice of a lawyer. He knew full well the impact of his actions.”
Judge Middlebrooks said Mr. Trump’s suit had been “brought in bad faith for an improper purpose” and had “needlessly harmed” the 31 individuals and organizations, including the Democratic National Committee, he had sued “in order to dishonestly advance a political narrative.” The judge added that Mr. Trump’s use of the courts had helped to undermine the public’s confidence in them.
“A continuing pattern of misuse of the courts by Mr. Trump and his lawyers undermines the rule of law, portrays judges as partisans and diverts resources from those who have suffered actual legal harm,” he wrote.
The judge said Mr. Trump and the lawyer who filed the case for him, Alina Habba, and her firm, Habba Madaio & Associates, were to pay $937,989.39.
The suit names Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and other people and entities that he claimed conspired to damage him in the 2016 e******n with what he called false claims about his ties to Russia. Among the defendants were Mr. Comey; the former deputy F.B.I. director Andrew G. McCabe, who opened the counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia; and the former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who helped circulate a dossier of lurid claims about Mr. Trump and Russia, many of which were unsubstantiated.
The conspiracy-minded racketeering suit was filed with hyperbole and exaggerations, and made claims easily shown to be false. In the ruling on Thursday, Judge Middlebrooks broke down how the suit’s claims — including that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Comey had conspired to take down Mr. Trump — were “implausible” and “categorically absurd.”
Mr. Trump’s claims were “a hodgepodge of disconnected, often immaterial events, followed by an implausible conclusion,” the judge wrote, adding, “This is a deliberate attempt to harass; to tell a story without regard to facts.”
Judge Middlebrooks, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton in 1997, threw out the suit in September, saying that “most of plaintiff’s claims are not only unsupported by any legal authority but plainly foreclosed by binding precedent.” The judge said that what the suit “lacks in substance and legal support, it seeks to substitute with length, hyperbole, and the settling of scores and grievances.”
He said Mr. Trump was trying to brandish a “political manifesto” against political rivals, masquerading as a lawsuit.
In November, Judge Middlebrooks fined Mr. Trump’s lawyers $50,000 and ordered them to pay the legal fees of one of the defendants. But a number of defendants, including Mrs. Clinton, filed jointly seeking additional sanctions, which the judge wrote at the time “may be appropriate.” The actions of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, he warned then, could also merit attention from “the bar and disciplinary authorities.”
Jan 20, 2023 06:35:19 #
National Park wrote:
New York Times br br By Michael S. Schmidt and Ma... (show quote)
Clinton appointed Judge, so not a surprise considering a Clinton was one of the defendants. The wife tells me this fine will likely never stand on appeal, which the plaintiffs will certainly do.
Jan 20, 2023 08:06:37 #
WNYShooter wrote:
Clinton appointed Judge, so not a surprise considering a Clinton was one of the defendants. The wife tells me this fine will likely never stand on appeal, which the plaintiffs will certainly do.
Does she think the guilty verdict will be overturned or just the fine? Does she believe trump is frivolous in his use of the courts, his delaying tactics, and accusations? How does she feel about frivolous lawsuits? Billable hours are billable hours.
Another loss in the “lock her up campaign”. Huber, Horowitz, Durham, Trump. Must be nothing there of any direct evidence.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/fall2016/cl32-3.pdf
Jan 20, 2023 08:42:03 #
WNYShooter wrote:
Clinton appointed Judge, so not a surprise considering a Clinton was one of the defendants. The wife tells me this fine will likely never stand on appeal, which the plaintiffs will certainly do.
When a lawsuit is a piece of crap it doesn't matter who appointed the judge, as Trump has discovered in his numerous bogus "stop the steal" lawsuits. Crap is crap is crap.
My guess is that the sanctions will be reduced on appeal because courts generally give attorneys lots of leeway in doing their clients' bidding, but this lawsuit was so lacking in merit that it would be surprising if the sanctions were totally vacated. And we shall see if the attorneys are disciplined by the bar for filing a meritless lawsuit, as has happened to a number of Trump attorneys who filed bogus "stop the steal" lawsuits.
I am curious, if the sanctions are reversed on appeal by Trump appointees, will you then be saying "no surprise considering Trump appointed judges and Trump was being sanctioned?"
Jan 20, 2023 08:50:25 #
Triple G wrote:
Does she think the guilty verdict will be overturned or just the fine? Does she believe trump is frivolous in his use of the courts, his delaying tactics, and accusations? How does she feel about frivolous lawsuits? Billable hours are billable hours.
Another loss in the “lock her up campaign”. Huber, Horowitz, Durham, Trump. Must be nothing there of any direct evidence.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/fall2016/cl32-3.pdf
Another loss in the “lock her up campaign”. Huber, Horowitz, Durham, Trump. Must be nothing there of any direct evidence.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/fall2016/cl32-3.pdf
Good article. Thanks for posting the link.
Jan 20, 2023 09:03:19 #
Racmanaz
Loc: Sunny Tucson!
National Park wrote:
New York Times br br By Michael S. Schmidt and Ma... (show quote)
Who cares? You are obsessed with everything Trump. I could not care less if he had to pay $1 billion.
Jan 20, 2023 09:11:26 #
BooIsMyCat
Loc: Somewhere
WNYShooter wrote:
Clinton appointed Judge, so not a surprise considering a Clinton was one of the defendants. The wife tells me this fine will likely never stand on appeal, which the plaintiffs will certainly do.
Ha! What did the wife say about the Chump appointed judge Aileen Cannon and her ruling on THE defendant that appointed HER?
Jan 20, 2023 10:45:58 #
Racmanaz wrote:
Who cares? You are obsessed with everything Trump. I could not care less if he had to pay $1 billion.
But I bet you would v**e for him if he is the 2024 Republican nominee.
Jan 20, 2023 11:08:57 #
Racmanaz wrote:
Who cares? You are obsessed with everything Trump. I could not care less if he had to pay $1 billion.
LOL, much like the same sentiments towards Big Perp?
Jan 20, 2023 12:33:05 #
Triple G wrote:
Does she think the guilty verdict will be overturned or just the fine? Does she believe trump is frivolous in his use of the courts, his delaying tactics, and accusations? How does she feel about frivolous lawsuits? Billable hours are billable hours.
Another loss in the “lock her up campaign”. Huber, Horowitz, Durham, Trump. Must be nothing there of any direct evidence.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/fall2016/cl32-3.pdf
Another loss in the “lock her up campaign”. Huber, Horowitz, Durham, Trump. Must be nothing there of any direct evidence.
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/fall2016/cl32-3.pdf
WOW are you clueless!!! There was no verdict in the case as there was no trial, the judge threw it out.
Jan 20, 2023 13:29:19 #
https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-fines-trump-attorney-1-million-filing-revenge/story?id=96554509
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/20/trump-drops-lawsuit-against-new-york-attorney-general-james.html
Corrected: Lawsuit was deemed fruvokous from the start. Does your wife agree?
I don't care if trump gets out of the fine; it seems to have impacted his behavior which was its intent.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/20/trump-drops-lawsuit-against-new-york-attorney-general-james.html
Corrected: Lawsuit was deemed fruvokous from the start. Does your wife agree?
I don't care if trump gets out of the fine; it seems to have impacted his behavior which was its intent.
Jan 20, 2023 14:25:22 #
Racmanaz
Loc: Sunny Tucson!
National Park wrote:
But I bet you would v**e for him if he is the 2024 Republican nominee.
Not in the primary I would not v**e for Trump. If Trump was the Republican candidate in the general e******n against Biden, I sure in hell would v**e for him over that i***t that we have there now.
Jan 20, 2023 14:29:32 #
National Park wrote:
New York Times br br By Michael S. Schmidt and Ma... (show quote)
It should happen more often but Most important . It should be standard that losers pay the legal fees of the winners .
Jan 20, 2023 14:41:58 #
Racmanaz wrote:
Not in the primary I would not v**e for Trump. If Trump was the Republican candidate in the general e******n against Biden, I sure in hell would v**e for him over that i***t that we have there now.
I had no doubt you would...
Jan 20, 2023 19:51:25 #
Shutterbug1697
Loc: Northeast
Racmanaz wrote:
Who cares? You are obsessed with everything Trump. I could not care less if he had to pay $1 billion.
But trump would certainly care if the sanction was $1Billion!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.