Trump Can't Post Bond; Novel Legal Issues

WASHINGTON - March 18, 2024 - PRLog -- Trump's just reported inability to obtain the bond necessary to appeal a $454 million judgement may raise novel legal issues, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who oversaw a similar problem in Florida.

Trump's lawyers, in a request filed today, urged a mid-level New York appeals court to delay enforcement of the judgment, arguing the amount was excessive.

They argued that "enforcing an impossible bond requirement as a condition of appeal would inflict manifest irreparable injury on Defendants," and that obtaining a bond for the full amount is "is not possible under the circumstances presented" because bonding companies demand cash or securities but not real estate as collateral.

Professor Banzhaf suggests that the right to appeal a questionable decision by a single judge who might even have been biased is fundamental.

Thus, imposing a requirement for doing so, which may be almost impossible for even a rich person such as Trump to do in a short period of time, might arguably infringe upon his due process and other fundamental rights, and therefore be unconstitutional.

In any event, he says, Trump's lawyers have not hesitated to advance much weaker legal arguments in several different cases, so they has nothing to lose by trying such an argument here and now.

Being forced to post the entire amount suddenly, in order to be able to appeal a huge verdict, was also challenged in a very different case in which Banzhaf was involved.

It occurred in 2000 when a Miami court entered a $144.8 BILLION verdict against major cigarette companies in a class action law suit [Engle] for killing smokers.

Thus, while tobacco attorneys did consider a constitutional challenge, they decided instead to persuade Florida to pass a special law for the cigarette makers capping appeal bonds at $100 million; a sum the companies could easily put up.

But the attorneys for the plaintiffs in that case were nevertheless able to protect their clients by threatening to challenge the constitutionality of this special interest legislation.

To prevent this challenge, and the mere possibility of having to post some $145 billion up front, the companies paid the class action plaintiff class $709 million not to raise the issue.

This imaginative and successful legal maneuver in Florida illustrates the problems a large verdict can create, even for defendants with lots of cash, says Banzhaf.

Banzhaf has been called "The Law Professor Who Masterminded Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry," "a Driving Force Behind the Lawsuits That Have Cost Tobacco Companies Billions of Dollars," and a "King of Class Action Law Suits," and is well known for coming up with novel but nevertheless successful legal theories in unusual situations.

http://banzhaf.net/  jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com  @profbanzhaf