Should Trump start paying E. Jean Carroll now?
01-28-2024, 11:53 AM
-
#31
- gachase21
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: Georgia, United States
- Posts: 31,767
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 389233
-
-
back to regarding subject in op:
Are the Courts Likely to Sustain the $65 Million in Punitive Damages Awarded Against Trump in the E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case?
A jury just found Donald Trump liable for over $83 million in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case. Of that, about $65 million are punitive damages.
Are the punitive damages likely to be sustained if challenged (as they will be) judicially?
To begin with, there’s the question whether the compensatory damages will stand. If they are found to be excessive, then the punitive damages would likely be gone as well, and a new trial on both damages held. I don’t have an opinion on the excessiveness of the compensatory damages because I did not pay close enough attention to the evidence at this latest trial.
But the punitive damages question presents different issues. Apart from any state court review, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that punitive damages sometimes are unconstitutional under the due process clause and require independent review (one of the leading cases here is State Farm v. Campbell).
The purpose of punitive damages is to punish and deter, and wealthier defendants would likely need a higher punitive damage award to be deterred. Also, Trump appears to be a recidivist, continuing to defame Carroll, which would justify a higher award.
That said, the Supreme Court has said that the wealth of the defendant cannot justify an otherwise unconstitutional award, and that when substantial compensatory damages are awarded (as they were in this case), then a punitive award should be in a relatively low ratio to compensatory damages (like a 1:1 ratio, meaning damages in the $18 million range).
It’s fairly common for a jury to award very high punitive damages to a rich defendant who has engaged in egregious conduct, only to see the punitive award lowered either by the trial court or on appeal.
We’ll see what happens, but the full $65 million in punitive damages is uncertain to stand.
https://electionlawblog.org/A jury just found Donald Trump liable for over $83 million in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case. Of that, about $65 million are punitive damages.
Are the punitive damages likely to be sustained if challenged (as they will be) judicially?
To begin with, there’s the question whether the compensatory damages will stand. If they are found to be excessive, then the punitive damages would likely be gone as well, and a new trial on both damages held. I don’t have an opinion on the excessiveness of the compensatory damages because I did not pay close enough attention to the evidence at this latest trial.
But the punitive damages question presents different issues. Apart from any state court review, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that punitive damages sometimes are unconstitutional under the due process clause and require independent review (one of the leading cases here is State Farm v. Campbell).
The purpose of punitive damages is to punish and deter, and wealthier defendants would likely need a higher punitive damage award to be deterred. Also, Trump appears to be a recidivist, continuing to defame Carroll, which would justify a higher award.
That said, the Supreme Court has said that the wealth of the defendant cannot justify an otherwise unconstitutional award, and that when substantial compensatory damages are awarded (as they were in this case), then a punitive award should be in a relatively low ratio to compensatory damages (like a 1:1 ratio, meaning damages in the $18 million range).
It’s fairly common for a jury to award very high punitive damages to a rich defendant who has engaged in egregious conduct, only to see the punitive award lowered either by the trial court or on appeal.
We’ll see what happens, but the full $65 million in punitive damages is uncertain to stand.
01-28-2024, 12:46 PM
-
#32
- Phil9
- Registered User
-
- Phil9
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2011
- Age: 39
- Posts: 27,396
- Rep Power: 35470
-
-
Originally Posted By gmenfan40⏩
Trump is known for stiffing his lawyers. Even Rudy G still has money owed. How does that fit into your fictitious narrative?Your "buddy" must be such a great attorney if he is sitting in the shadows making pennies in comparison to the ones Trump or anyone with real money hires. It's easy to sit in the dark and judge... (Super Ded fkn Srs)
01-28-2024, 12:50 PM
-
#33
Fuking a lot of triggering being set off in this thread lmao.
You all gonna get taken for a ride.
You all gonna get taken for a ride.
"I am a rational animal who occupies the intermediary position between angel and beast"
"The upper class is afforded their position by the collective burden the underclass must carry for them"
**Summer Walker Crew**
01-28-2024, 12:59 PM
-
#34
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gachase21⏩
I’m no legal expert, but it seems you’re misinterpreting the seven month statement. Seven months from the start of the indictment (and this is not a hard rule, she can change her mind anytime). He was indicted 8/1 and that time has presumably been ticking until the current stay.This article, and the timeline it suggested, was a horrible analysis- mocked by people in the legal community on both the left and right side.
As demonstrated so far with how wrong it has been on the timeline so far.
What makes it strange is the writers are fairly respectable - but this just turned out to be another demonstration as to how normal-thinking people can absolutely lose their chit it terms of rational thinking when it comes to anything involving Trump.
-The mere suggestion a decision- with 5 unprecedented measures- would come so quickly to start with is baffling.
-The left out the impact of Fisher??? a case that can likely eliminate 2 of Trump's 4 DC charges, that aren't even in Scotus until June
-The ignored Cannons stronghold of the May trial date in Florida, which MAGA Cannons helped team Trump in delaying everything else - except the trial date- which she will likely do in March. (she has to now with all the other measures delayed). But by waiting for the delay, it's preventing Chutkan from doing March or June
-Many other things it missed- horrid write-up
Here is the reality:
Since that article was published...
1. On January 18th DC trial Judge Chutkan acknowledged in a ruling the March trial date won't work anymore, with the delay in appeals, and her lack of Jursdition until it's finished. She also stated that when it is finally returned to her court, Trump was og allotted 7 months of prep time, and the clock is paused until it is back to her court- so he will still have all the remaining time left.
Also, Judge Chutkan barred special counsel Jack Smith from filing substantive new motions without advance permission while the trial is out of her jurisdiction on appeal.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...8148.195.0.pdf
2. After that, in seeing the reality of the delay, on the 24th she went further into going ahead and scheduling a different Trial for April (meaning that slot is now occupied)
3. And then you got the reality of how long an en banc and SCOTUS hearing could go. If it ends up getting cert grant by SCOTUS- and making it there - are looking Last week June, 1st few days of July ruling likely- in which according the January 18th dc Judge filing- Trump's 7 7-month clock would just then continue.
But wait, there's more!!!
Next, you have Ultrea MAGA Judge Cannon in Florida who had delayed virtually everything, even suspended hearings, - except the May trial date (which has to be delayed now) and she doesn't plan on having the delayed hearing until March. Thus excluding Judge Chutkan from getting a May, or even early June, Trial anyway. And the pace Cannon plan- Trump will for sure not have that trial before election...
It is a trial chess game, and Judge Cannon holds the middle of the board...
Smith also made a crucial strategic error in filling the FL trial 1st- so now she has leverage.
More on that:
But wait, there's more!!!
Also, you have the Fisher case- which isn't set to be heard until June- and would possibly all but negate 2 of Trump's major DC charges
Cont next post...
As demonstrated so far with how wrong it has been on the timeline so far.
What makes it strange is the writers are fairly respectable - but this just turned out to be another demonstration as to how normal-thinking people can absolutely lose their chit it terms of rational thinking when it comes to anything involving Trump.
-The mere suggestion a decision- with 5 unprecedented measures- would come so quickly to start with is baffling.
-The left out the impact of Fisher??? a case that can likely eliminate 2 of Trump's 4 DC charges, that aren't even in Scotus until June
-The ignored Cannons stronghold of the May trial date in Florida, which MAGA Cannons helped team Trump in delaying everything else - except the trial date- which she will likely do in March. (she has to now with all the other measures delayed). But by waiting for the delay, it's preventing Chutkan from doing March or June
-Many other things it missed- horrid write-up
Here is the reality:
Since that article was published...
1. On January 18th DC trial Judge Chutkan acknowledged in a ruling the March trial date won't work anymore, with the delay in appeals, and her lack of Jursdition until it's finished. She also stated that when it is finally returned to her court, Trump was og allotted 7 months of prep time, and the clock is paused until it is back to her court- so he will still have all the remaining time left.
Also, Judge Chutkan barred special counsel Jack Smith from filing substantive new motions without advance permission while the trial is out of her jurisdiction on appeal.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...8148.195.0.pdf
2. After that, in seeing the reality of the delay, on the 24th she went further into going ahead and scheduling a different Trial for April (meaning that slot is now occupied)
3. And then you got the reality of how long an en banc and SCOTUS hearing could go. If it ends up getting cert grant by SCOTUS- and making it there - are looking Last week June, 1st few days of July ruling likely- in which according the January 18th dc Judge filing- Trump's 7 7-month clock would just then continue.
But wait, there's more!!!
Next, you have Ultrea MAGA Judge Cannon in Florida who had delayed virtually everything, even suspended hearings, - except the May trial date (which has to be delayed now) and she doesn't plan on having the delayed hearing until March. Thus excluding Judge Chutkan from getting a May, or even early June, Trial anyway. And the pace Cannon plan- Trump will for sure not have that trial before election...
It is a trial chess game, and Judge Cannon holds the middle of the board...
Smith also made a crucial strategic error in filling the FL trial 1st- so now she has leverage.
More on that:
But wait, there's more!!!
Also, you have the Fisher case- which isn't set to be heard until June- and would possibly all but negate 2 of Trump's major DC charges
Cont next post...
Everything in the timeline I sent you assumed that nothing would progress during the stay, so your point about that is meaningless.
I’m not sure what you mean by the slot being occupied. Judges frequently preside over multiple cases at the same time. Is there a rule you’re aware of that would that prevent Chutkan from moving forward w/ Trump due to the April 24 date you linked.
Don’t you find it interesting that most of your points demonstrate how reasonable and impartial Judge Chutkan has been, while clearly showing Cannon is playing politics. Contradicts the whole Trump is treated unfairly narrative.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
01-28-2024, 01:16 PM
-
#35
- gachase21
- Join Date: Dec 2010
- Location: Georgia, United States
- Posts: 31,767
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 389233
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Yes - 7 months from start- I'm not disagreeing with that - why I say October is possibleI’m no legal expert, but it seems you’re misinterpreting the seven month statement. Seven months from the start of the indictment (and this is not a hard rule, she can change her mind anytime). He was indicted 8/1 and that time has presumably been ticking until the current stay.
Everything in the timeline I sent you assumed that nothing would progress during the stay, so your point about that is meaningless.
I’m not sure what you mean by the slot being occupied. Judges frequently preside over multiple cases at the same time. Is there a rule you’re aware of that would that prevent Chutkan from moving forward w/ Trump due to the April 24 date you linked.
Don’t you find it interesting that most of your points demonstrate how reasonable and impartial Judge Chutkan has been, while clearly showing Cannon is playing politics. Contradicts the whole Trump is treated unfairly narrative.
Everything in the timeline I sent you assumed that nothing would progress during the stay, so your point about that is meaningless.
I’m not sure what you mean by the slot being occupied. Judges frequently preside over multiple cases at the same time. Is there a rule you’re aware of that would that prevent Chutkan from moving forward w/ Trump due to the April 24 date you linked.
Don’t you find it interesting that most of your points demonstrate how reasonable and impartial Judge Chutkan has been, while clearly showing Cannon is playing politics. Contradicts the whole Trump is treated unfairly narrative.
Also Judge C isn't being impartial at all- the original March trial date was way before any normal trial would be set for something like this- and an error
She could have booked August from the get-go and most of this wouldn't be an issue.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts