Podcast Summary
Judicial ethics violation allegations: A non-party, non-attorney conversation with a judge could potentially influence their decision in a case, but the decision to recuse or disqualify the judge is usually made by the judge themselves during the initial hearing.
The legal efforts to challenge a $465 million fraud judgment against Donald Trump continue, with recent attempts focusing on disqualifying and recusing Judge Arthur Engoron in New York State Supreme Court. The basis for this motion is a conversation that took place between a non-party, non-attorney lawyer, Adam Lietman Bailey, and the judge in May, which allegedly influenced the judge's decision. However, this issue is typically decided by the judge themselves during the initial hearing, and the first hearing in this case is scheduled to be in front of Judge Engoron. The defense team, led by Alina Haba, has argued that this conversation constitutes a violation of judicial ethics. Despite the delay in reporting this incident, it is essential to note that these issues are often decided at the trial court level.
Lawyer's comments during break: Lawyer's unsolicited comments during a courtroom break do not constitute ex parte communications if they do not influence decision or create appearance of bias
A lawyer's unsolicited comments to a judge during a courtroom break about a pending case before a decision is rendered does not constitute an ex parte communication. Ex parte communications are strictly limited under judicial canons and refer to conversations between a judge and a party or their counsel without the other party present. Such conversations can create an appearance of impropriety and are generally discouraged. However, a brief, passing comment about the case made to the judge during a break, such as over an egg salad sandwich, does not influence the decision or create an appearance of bias. The judge is free to ignore such comments and base their decision solely on the facts and evidence presented in the case.
Ex parte communication vs non-party influence: Judges' conversations with non-parties don't constitute ex parte communication if the judge isn't influenced and discloses it, but misrepresenting the law in a brief is significant and requires accurate legal analysis.
The conversation between a non-party and a judge, even if it could be seen as influencing the judge's decision, does not necessarily constitute an ex parte communication. The distinction lies in the fact that the non-party is not a party to the case or a lawyer for a party. The judge's disclosure and decision not to be influenced by the conversation are crucial. However, the brief in question misrepresents the relevant law, stating that any communication outside the presence of parties must be strictly scrutinized, when in fact it is communications with parties or their counsel that require such scrutiny. The mischaracterization of the law in the brief is significant and highlights the importance of accurate legal analysis.
Estate Planning, Judicial Impartiality: Estate planning through services like Trust and Will is an affordable investment for securing assets and protecting loved ones. Judges' impartiality is essential in ensuring fair decision-making in the legal realm.
Securing your assets and protecting your loved ones through estate planning is a valuable investment. With services like Trust and Will, creating and managing a custom estate plan is now accessible and affordable, starting at just $199. Trust and Will offers a simple, step-by-step process, bank-level encryption, and live customer support. Thousands of families trust and use this service, and it has excellent ratings and five-star reviews on Trust Pilot. Meanwhile, in the legal realm, it was discussed that a judge's impartiality is not compromised by being a stranger to the case or making a comment that is not part of the litigation. A judge's reserved, guarded, and circumspect demeanor is preferred over potential corruption. These principles apply even to extrajudicial communications, as long as they are not part of the litigation. In summary, securing your future through estate planning and trusting the impartiality of judges in their decision-making are essential aspects of our lives. Trust and Will provides an accessible and affordable solution for the former, while the latter relies on the established legal principles of impartiality and the role of the judiciary.
Trump's legal team: Trump's legal team filed a baseless motion against Judge Boasberg, alleging ex-parte communication, but there's no evidence and it's seen as a distraction tactic.
The recent motion filed by Donald Trump's legal team against Judge James Boasberg in the DC District Court is being criticized as a baseless attempt to discredit the judge and distract from ongoing legal proceedings. The motion alleges that Judge Boasberg had an ex-parte communication with a lawyer involved in the case, but there is no evidence to support this claim and the judge did not rely on the information in his ruling. The Trump team's argument that the judge cannot be neutral because of his public statements against Trump also does not apply, as this exception only applies to ex-parte communications. The motion is seen as a stunt to provide Trump with a talking point for the upcoming debate, rather than a legitimate legal argument. Additionally, there are reports of a judicial ethics investigation into Judge Boasberg regarding this issue, but the court personnel have also stated that there was no ex-parte communication and it is not a concern.
Improper communication with judge: Attempting to influence a judge by signing a legal document with a Sharpie pen used by a former president and potentially revoking an attorney's admission to the court may lead to an unsuccessful first step in a two-step legal process and potential sanctions
The legal team for former President Donald Trump is attempting to have a judge recused from a case and requesting an evidentiary hearing, which is expected to be denied due to lack of merit. The team, led by attorneys Alina Haba and Cliff Robert, has signed the motion with a Sharpie pen used by Trump. Chris Kice is also listed as a signatory, but his admission to the court may be revoked due to non-compliance with ethical codes. The New York Attorney General is expected to comment on the motion and seek sanctions. The judge will consider both sides' briefs before deciding whether to hold an evidentiary hearing or not. This is the first step in a two-step process, with the second step being an appeal to the appellate court if the judge is removed. However, the first step is unlikely to succeed due to the improper communication regarding judicial conduct.
Trump legal challenge: Despite losing multiple appeals, Trump's team continues to challenge the judge in the ongoing fraud case, but it's unlikely to succeed due to respect for the judiciary and the lengthy nature of legal proceedings
Despite losing several times in the Appellate Division First Department in the Trump fraud case, Donald Trump's team is attempting to remove Judge Angoron from the case. However, the Appellate Division respects Judge Angoron and is unlikely to remove him. Trump's team will have to appeal to the Court of Appeals next. Judge Angoron is expected to survive this challenge as well. This is a significant development in the ongoing fraud case against Trump, and it underscores the complexity and lengthy nature of such legal proceedings. It also highlights the importance of respecting the decisions of the judiciary and allowing the legal process to run its course. As always, we will continue to follow this case closely and bring you the latest updates on the Midas Touch network and on our legal AF podcast. Stay tuned for more legal analysis from Michael Popok, your go-to source for law and politics.
LegalAF Patreon: LegalAF offers exclusive, in-depth legal explanations through Patreon for a few cups of coffee, providing unique insights not found elsewhere in the legal field
LegalAF provides in-depth explanations of important legal concepts that go beyond the headlines. This exclusive content is only available through their Patreon page for the cost of a few cups of coffee. If you're looking to gain a deeper understanding of the legal topics discussed daily, LegalAF is the place to be. With content not found anywhere else, joining LegalAF is a valuable investment for anyone interested in the legal field. So, if you want to stay informed and educated on the latest legal issues, head over to patreon.com and sign up for LegalAF today.