The lawyers suing Donald Trump for fraud over Trump University are now pushing for a trial in the case to start as early as June — a time which, if granted, could complicate the Republican frontrunner’s plans on the eve of the July GOP convention.
In court papers filed this week with U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel in San Diego, a lead lawyer in a pending class-action suit against Trump University argued that “time is of the essence in getting this case to trial.”
The plaintiff’s lawyer, Rachel Jensen, also cited newly unsealed excerpts from a deposition Trump gave last December. In one contentious exchange, the billionaire businessman testified: “Let’s just go to court and get this case — I’m dying to go to court in this case.”
At an upcoming trial conference, Jensen wrote, “Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court set a date certain for trial — either in June or August, and either a jury or bench trial, at defendant’s election,” according to a brief filed with Curiel.
The judge has yet to rule on the request, although he has scheduled a final pretrial conference in the long-pending lawsuit for May 6. But at a pretrial conference last week, Trump’s lead lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli, argued that his client’s presidential run has complicated things; earlier, the parties had discussed beginning the trial in August. “I’m going to have a lot to say on this topic if he is the nominee,” Petrocelli said, later adding: “This would be a zoo if it goes to trial.”
The upcoming trial over Trump University has loomed increasingly large in Trump’s presidential bid, given that he is both the lead defendant in the case and a scheduled witness. The plaintiffs are suing Trump for deceptive trade practices and other fraudulent acts, contending that he deceived them and thousands of others into paying as much as $35,000 for his courses and “mentoring” by the mogul’s “hand-picked” real estate experts, who would teach them how to “make a killing” in the real estate market.
In fact, according to recently released excerpts from Trump’s deposition, he was unable to recognize the names (or photographs) of any nstructors at the school, and acknowledged he played no direct role in selecting them. And, some of the plaintiffs argue, the courses were largely worthless, and left them with large debts.
Trump has vigorously contested these allegations, both in court through his lawyers and more recently on the campaign trial, contending that 98 percent of students who attended the courses filled out evaluation forms giving them positive ratings.
But Trump also recently suggested that he may seek to have Curiel recused from the case, asserting that he is biased against him because Curiel is Hispanic and therefore presumably objects to Trump’s plan to build a wall on the Mexican border. (Curiel last year rejected a motion by Trump’s lawyers to dismiss the case on summary judgment.)
By Michael Isikoff
Culled from Yahoo News.
No comments:
Post a Comment