In a move raising eyebrows among legal experts, Alina Habba, attorney for former President Donald Trump, has filed a letter requesting information about potential conflicts of interest involving the judge who oversaw Trump’s defamation trial against writer E. Jean Carroll. This development comes after a jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in damages in November 2022, finding Trump liable for defamation related to his denials of Carroll’s sexual assault accusation.
Habba’s Claims: A Web of Past Professional Connections
Habba’s argument hinges on Judge Lewis Kaplan’s past association with Roberta Kaplan, attorney for E. Jean Carroll. Both Kaplans worked at the same law firm in the 1990s, with sources claiming a potential mentor-mentee relationship between the two. Additionally, Habba highlights that Judge Kaplan officiated the wedding of Carroll’s other lead counsel, Shawn Crowley, who previously served as his law clerk.
Seeking Disclosure and Potential Recusal:
Habba requests further information about Judge Kaplan’s past interactions with the Kaplans, claiming its potential relevance to Trump’s expected motion for a new trial. Her argument revolves around the possibility that these pre-existing professional connections could have influenced the judge’s impartiality during the trial.
Expert Responses: Skepticism and Criticism
Legal experts have met Habba’s claim with skepticism, questioning its merit and timing. Some, like former prosecutor Daniel Alonso, dismiss it as “nonsense,” pointing out that any competent lawyer would be aware of the Kaplans’ shared past employers. Others, like defense attorney Andrew Fleischman, highlight the waived objection clause, where Trump’s team did not raise concerns about the judge’s connections before or during the trial, essentially forfeiting the right to do so later.
Uncertain Outlook: Procedural Hurdles and Legal Battles Ahead
Habba’s request for further information presents Judge Kaplan with a procedural hurdle before proceeding with any potential recusal motion. He may first need to determine whether these past connections warrant disclosing additional details and whether they potentially impacted his ability to preside over the case with impartiality.
Related articles
If the judge deems further inquiry necessary, it could open a new chapter in the ongoing legal battle between Trump and Carroll. Should Habba’s recusal motion be rejected, Trump’s team will then face the uphill task of convincing the court to grant a new trial based on this specific argument.
Key Takeaways:
- Trump’s lawyer raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving the presiding judge.
- Past professional connections between Judge Kaplan and Carroll’s attorneys form the basis of the claim.
- Legal experts express skepticism over the argument’s merit and timing.
- Judge Kaplan now faces a procedural hurdle to decide on further inquiry or potential recusal.
- The development adds another layer to the ongoing legal saga between Trump and Carroll.
Discussion about this post