Loading...
In a significant development, the lawyer representing E. Jean Carroll, the woman who accused former President Donald Trump of sexual assault, has argued before a federal judge that Trump’s post-trial comments denying the incident are relevant to a separate pending lawsuit against him. This latest twist comes after a jury awarded $5 million in damages to Carroll on May 9 in a defamation lawsuit, finding that Trump had sexually assaulted her but not raped her and that he had defamed her by denying the allegations.
According to an amended complaint filed by Carroll on May 22 in the separate case against Trump, the former president dismissed knowledge of Carroll, referring to her as a “whack job” during a CNN town hall held the day after the verdict. Trump’s social media posts following the trial also drew attention, where he reiterated his lack of familiarity with Carroll, describing the verdict as a part of the “greatest witch hunt of all time!” He further labeled Carroll’s accusations and the lawsuit as a “rigged hoax.”
The lawsuit that resulted in the jury ruling in favor of Carroll is commonly referred to as Carroll II. It was filed under New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which provides a one-year window for adults alleging sexual assault to sue over previously time-barred claims. The defamatory statements in this lawsuit were based on Trump’s remarks in October 2022.
On the other hand, the separate pending lawsuit, known as Carroll I, alleges that Trump defamed Carroll by denying the sexual assault in comments made prior to October 2022. Lawyer Roberta Kaplan, representing Carroll, expressed her intention to add Trump’s post-trial comments to the Carroll I suit, asserting their relevance to the issue of punitive damages. Kaplan also argued that the jury findings in the Carroll II trial have a “preclusive effect” on Carroll’s separate Carroll I suit. She emphasized that the central question in both cases revolves around whether Trump sexually assaulted Carroll, a matter already resolved in Carroll II. Additionally, Kaplan highlighted that the allegedly defamatory comments in both lawsuits are “materially identical.”
Both lawsuits stem from Carroll’s claim that Trump sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in New York City. While the jury ruling in Carroll II has brought some resolution, one outstanding issue in the Carroll I suit remains: whether Trump’s denial of Carroll’s claims falls within the scope of his presidential employment. If the court determines that it does, the United States would replace Trump as the defendant in the case, resulting in no liability for him personally.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
Presiding over both cases is U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan of the Southern District of New York, who will carefully consider the arguments put forth by Carroll’s lawyer as well as any potential implications for punitive damages and the overall trajectory of the Carroll I suit.
The evolving legal landscape surrounding these cases highlights the ongoing battle between Carroll and Trump, with their respective legal teams fiercely advocating for their clients. As the proceedings continue, the outcome of Carroll’s efforts to include Trump’s post-trial comments in the Carroll I suit remains uncertain, leaving room for further courtroom debates and potential revelations in this high-profile and closely watched legal saga.
