A judge in New York expressed frustration at Donald Trump’s defense counsel while considering sanctioning the defendants and their lawyers for making frivolous arguments in the state’s civil case against the former president and others.
“When I first heard those arguments, I thought that was a joke,” said Judge Arthur Engoron, who added that he has repeatedly ruled on and been upheld on some of the arguments rehashed by defense.
“The rule on sanctions is if you’ve been warned, don’t do it. You were warned,” Engoron said.
“As a lawyer, I have to make the arguments,” Trump attorney Chris Kise told Engoron.
Kise earlier in the afternoon asked the judge to dismiss the case against Trump and the other defendants.
“What is happening here is what happens every day in complex business transitions,” Kise said about the vast differences in appraisals for Trump’s assets.
When Kise argued that no one was harmed by Trump’s business dealings, Engoron offered a frank assessment.
“The fact that no one was hurt does not mean the case gets dismissed,” Engoron said, adding that he believes that “fairness in the marketplace” was a victim of the defendants’ actions.
Judges will often bend over backwards to limit the possibility of a successful appeal. They don’t like having an appeals court overturn a verdict since it means they would then have to retry the entire case again.
By giving the defense multiple warnings they’re effectively preventing them from using this instance as a credible argument in an appeal. In an appeal the defense might say something like “the judge unfairly ruled against me regarding X”. But the appellate court will see in the transcript that the judge issued multiple warnings before ruling on X and use that to reject the claim.
I like your rationale here. It’s a good reason and it makes sense. Thanks for that
I don’t like the part that it’s taken the justice system 30 years to start dealing with this clown. If it were anyone else…