Trump’s Lawyers Discover Hidden Conflict of Interest in $83.3 Million Verdict Appeal

NEW YORK CITY, NY – Donald Trump’s legal team plans to utilize a previously undisclosed “conflict of interest” between E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer and the judge overseeing her defamation case against the former president as grounds for their appeal against the massive $83.3 million jury verdict, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Trump attorney Alina Habba stated that she was unaware of the connection between Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, until recently. The two had reportedly worked together in the 1990s at a prominent law firm. Habba argues that the failure to disclose this relationship is a violation of judicial ethics rules.

Roberta Kaplan, who worked at Paul, Weiss Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison from 1992 to 2016, claims that there is no conflict of interest. She has since left the firm to become a founding partner of Kaplan Hecker & Fink. However, a former partner at Paul Weiss alleged that Judge Kaplan served as a mentor to Roberta Kaplan during her early years at the firm.

The $83.3 million verdict against Trump was delivered last Friday by a jury in Manhattan federal court. The jury found Trump liable for defaming Carroll when he dismissed her allegations of sexual assault as a “hoax” and called her a “whack job.” Some legal experts have questioned the size of the award, as it is unclear how much monetary damage Trump’s statements caused Carroll.

Following the verdict, Trump expressed his intent to appeal the decision. He criticized both verdicts, calling the legal system “out of control” and accusing it of being “used as a Political Weapon.” The appeal will now include the alleged conflict of interest between Judge Kaplan and Carroll’s lawyer.

This new information adds another layer to the ongoing legal battle between Carroll and Trump. It remains to be seen how this potential conflict of interest will be addressed in the appeal and whether it will impact the outcome of the case.