Under the Radar Blog Archives Select Date… August, 2020 July, 2020 June, 2020 May, 2020 April, 2020 March, 2020 February, 2020 January, 2020 December, 2019 November, 2019 October, 2019 September, 2019

Donald Trump's lawyers are asking that the trial set for Nov. 28 be delayed until sometime after the inauguration. | Getty Trump University plaintiffs propose trial without Trump

Lawyers pursuing a federal class-action fraud lawsuit over Donald Trump's Trump University real-estate program are urging a judge to press forward with a trial scheduled to begin later this month, even if that means forgoing any new testimony from the president-elect.

Citing his pressing transition-related obligations, Trump's lawyers are asking that the trial set for Nov. 28 be delayed until sometime after the inauguration, with Trump providing in the next two months a new round of prerecorded testimony to be shown to jurors when the trial takes place.

However, in a court filing Monday, plaintiffs lawyers warned U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel that that any further delays in the case risk rolling the case into Trump's presidency and ever more protracted postponements.

"We do know that any delay would be a slippery slope because President-Elect Trump’s life is only going to get more complicated and unpredictable as time goes by," lawyers for the former Trump University students wrote. "Plaintiffs have waited more than six-and-a-half years for their day in court, and it would be an injustice to them and undermine the independence and truth-seeking function of the judiciary to ask them to wait until Trump assumes office and the demands of the presidency turn from mere preparation to actual practice....This trial, like so many Trump University student-victims’ credit-card bills, is past due."

Plaintiffs' lawyers are urging that the trial go on as scheduled and that both sides be required to work with the more than ten hours of deposition testimony Trump has already given on the subject.

"There is no reason to believe President-Elect Trump has any additional admissible testimony to offer, let alone testimony so important that he would be prejudiced if he is not able to present it at trial," the class-action lawyers wrote.

At a hearing last week, Curiel urged both sides to pursue settlement talks. The plaintiffs' filing refers in passing to the possibility of settlement, but argues that prospect won't be brought any closer by deferring the trial date until sometime after the inauguration.

"No case has ever gotten closer to resolution by postponing trial," the plaintiffs' attorneys observe.

The suit set for trial later this month is one of two class-action lawsuits over Trump University pending in front of Curiel in San Diego. Both involve claims that the real-estate seminar and mentorship program defrauded students by falsely claiming that instructors were handpicked by Trump and by promoting the idea that the program was part of an accredited university.

The suit set first for trial involves claims students from California, New York and Florida have leveled under strict consumer fraud laws in those states. The follow-on case is nationwide in scope and involves racketeering claims under federal law.

Trump's recent motion, filed on Saturday night, proposes that he give one more round of videotaped testimony to be shown at trials in both federal suits. If a settlement is reached, it would also likely cover both cases.

Trump University also faces a suit New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman brought in that state's courts, alleging that the seminar program continued to use that name there even after being warned that state law prohibits businesses from calling themselves universities unless they are properly accredited.

Trump's lawyers contend that any exaggerations in the marketing of Trump University amounted to mere "puffery." They also say that any misstatements were immaterial since the vast majority of students said in evaluation questionnaires or videos that they were satisfied with the program.

Curiel has seemed eager to get on with the trial and he rebuffed an earlier request for delay due to a conflict with another case being handled by Trump's lawyers. However, it's unclear if the judge fully considered before last week the possibility that Trump would be president-elect as work began to seat a jury in the case.

A ruling on the pending motion is expected quickly.