Jump to content

'Apprentice' contestant's lawsuit against Trump to proceed: NY judge


webfact

Recommended Posts

'Apprentice' contestant's lawsuit against Trump to proceed: NY judge

By Brendan Pierson

 

2018-06-05T164410Z_1_LYNXNPEE541MN_RTROPTP_4_USA-TRUMP-APPRENTICE-LAWSUIT.JPG

FILE PHOTO: Summer Zervos, a former contestant on The Apprentice, leaves New York State Supreme Court with attorney Gloria Allred, after a hearing on the defamation case against U.S. President Donald Trump in Manhattan, New York City, U.S., December 5, 2017. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A former contestant on Donald Trump's reality TV show "The Apprentice" may pursue her defamation lawsuit against the U.S. president, a New York state judge ruled on Tuesday, despite Trump's effort to have an appeals court put it on hold.

 

The contestant, Summer Zervos, has claimed that Trump sexually harassed her and defamed her when he denied her allegations.

 

Trump has argued that as a sitting president he is immune from the lawsuit and is seeking an order from New York's highest court freezing the case.

 

The lawsuit could lead to Trump being questioned under oath, and draw further attention to accusations of sexual misconduct against the president by more than a dozen women. Trump has denied the claims.

 

At a hearing on Tuesday, Trump's lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, argued unsuccessfully before Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter that Zervos' lawsuit should not go forward until the New York Court of Appeals, and if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court, decides the issue.

 

"It's merely seeking a determination at the highest level of competent jurisdiction as to the resolution of this very important constitutional issue," Kasowitz said.

 

Zervos accused Trump of subjecting her to unwanted kissing and groping after she sought career advice in 2007.

 

She came forward during the 2016 presidential campaign, and Trump called her allegations lies. He also retweeted a post calling Zervos' claims a "hoax."

 

The White House has labeled as liars more than a dozen women who have publicly accused Trump of sexual misconduct.

 

Kasowitz said at Tuesday's hearing that he may seek to exclude from the case any evidence about other women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct, though he did not make a formal motion.

 

Schechter set a schedule for exchange of evidence, saying it should begin with documents. Depositions of the parties must be done by Jan. 31, 2019, raising the possibility that Trump would have to submit to questioning by Zervos' lawyers before that date.

 

A state appeals court last month refused to stay the Zervos case while it considered Trump's appeal of a Schecter order in March that the case go ahead. Trump is now asking the Court of Appeals to impose a stay.

 

Schechter said on Tuesday she was allowing the case to proceed because the appeals court did not issue a stay. In March, she said there was no authority to dismiss litigation related "purely to unofficial conduct" solely because he occupied the White House.

 

"No one is above the law," the judge wrote then.

 

Zervos' lawyer, Mariann Wang, said multiple judges had rebuffed Trump's argument and the case should be go ahead.

"We understand it should be orderly. We want to cooperate with defendant in good faith to figure out when and how to proceed," she said.

Kasowitz and Wang both declined to comment after the hearing.

 

Trump is facing legal pressure from other women as well. Among them, adult film star Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, filed suit against him in March in a challenge to a nondisclosure agreement to keep her quiet about a sexual encounter she said she had with Trump in 2006.

 

(Reporting By Brendan Pierson in New York; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-06-06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ‘disclosure’ phase of this is going to be interesting.

 

Did Trump put Cohen on the case?

 

If so will details be revealed in the release of the documents the FEDs secured when they raided Cohen? The review of those documents for client privilege ends next Friday (15th).

 

The truth will ( despite a Trumps best efforts) out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Basil B said:

pointless... he can just pardon himself. :cheesy: 

Didn't work for Nixon (or Clinton?).

 

An 'apprentice' TV competitor hoping that she can make money from a civil case against a wealthy man, is just a 'poor' version of the Clinton scandal IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why on earth do we have to put up with this sort of crap?

 

Monica was fair enough to a certain extent, as she made it clear that Clinton wasn't the 'family oriented' guy he pretended to be.

 

But 'apprentice' TV programme contestants, that were clearly involved for the monetary gain - pursuing a defamation law case??  Really??

 

Of course the trump 'haters' love this sort of thing.

 

If only the democrats had put forward a better candidate we wouldn't be in the middle of such an obvious hate campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Why on earth do we have to put up with this sort of crap?

 

Monica was fair enough to a certain extent, as she made it clear that Clinton wasn't the 'family oriented' guy he pretended to be.

 

But 'apprentice' TV programme contestants, that were clearly involved for the monetary gain - pursuing a defamation law case??  Really??

 

Of course the trump 'haters' love this sort of thing.

 

If only the democrats had put forward a better candidate we wouldn't be in the middle of such an obvious hate campaign.

 

So the US will be getting like Thailand then? Every time someone accusers you of something, and you deny it, they will sue for defamation and of course you will counter sue as they accused you in the first place!

 

More money for the lawyers - Party Time!!

 

Good job defamation is only a civil matter in the US.........................................

 

People who go on reality TV are after their 2 mins of fame. Guess she still hopes for hers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Why on earth do we have to put up with this sort of crap?

 

Monica was fair enough to a certain extent, as she made it clear that Clinton wasn't the 'family oriented' guy he pretended to be.

 

But 'apprentice' TV programme contestants, that were clearly involved for the monetary gain - pursuing a defamation law case??  Really??

 

Of course the trump 'haters' love this sort of thing.

 

If only the democrats had put forward a better candidate we wouldn't be in the middle of such an obvious hate campaign.

If only the Russians had not interfered in the election.

 

But let’s neither of us digress, this case is about Trump’s behaviour before the election. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...