Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

‘Trump University’ Case is Going to Trial

‘Trump University’ Case is Going to Trial

Donald Trump to be a witness

Tuesday, a New York judge decided the ‘Trump University’ case will go to trial.

No trial date has been set (Fox News reports tentative trial date would be sometime this fall), but New York’s Attorney General indicated he expects Republican presidential frontrunner, Donald Trump to testify as a witness.

Allegations of fraud have plagued the now defunct ‘Trump University’ for years, but up until now, Trump’s legal team successfully avoided trial.

Though Trump University didn’t issue degrees, the real estate seminar series didn’t live up to the advertisement’s guarantees, say plaintiffs, which include New York’s Attorney General. The Week reported:

While it didn’t grant degrees or have a campus, Trump University charged students expensive rates for what critics deemed “useless” real estate seminars. “I really felt stupid that I was scammed by Trump. I thought that he was really legit,” student Bob Guillo told The Washington Post after putting $34,995 on his American Express card — only to walk away with meaningless certificates of completion and a photo of him with a life-size picture of Trump.

If Trump walks away from Cincinnati with the Republican presidential nomination, the GOP might be watching their presidential candidate answering to fraud charges from the witness stand just in time for the general election. “Disastrous” doesn’t even scratch the surface.

Fox News reported:

New York County Supreme Court Judge Cynthia Kern made the decision at a hearing Tuesday, though it remains unclear whether the case will be weighed at a jury trial – which is what Trump’s team is seeking. Trump attorney Jeffrey Goldman said it’s possible the trial could be held this fall, and Trump could testify.

In the case, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, a Democrat, has accused Trump and others of misleading thousands of students over the school.

Schneiderman alleges that Trump University was unlicensed since it began operating in 2005 and promised lessons with real estate experts hand-picked by Trump, only one of whom had ever met him. The attorney general said the school used “bait-and-switch” tactics, inducing students to enroll in increasingly expensive seminars.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing. He has said it was “a terrific school” with 98 percent approval ratings by its students.

Schneiderman had sued Trump and the school, which changed its name to the Trump Entrepreneur Initiative before it closed in 2010, for $40 million. The lawsuit seeks restitution and damages for more than 5,000 students nationwide, including 600 New Yorkers, who paid up to $35,000 each.

Ahead of the Indiana’s primary, Our Principles PAC is running ads on both radio and TV this week, hoping to draw attention to Trump’s involvement in ‘Trump University.’

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Trump = Trump University = Fraud!!!

So an democrat politician is using the legal system to try and benefit Hillary. That is a surprise.

    Tyrconnell in reply to Gary Britt. | April 26, 2016 at 6:46 pm

    Except that the charges were filed in 2013.

    malclave in reply to Gary Britt. | April 26, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    So an democrat politician is using the legal system to try and benefit Hillary.

    You’re saying this is part of Trump’s plan?

    Yeah, Trump’s Manafort!

    spartan in reply to Gary Britt. | April 26, 2016 at 9:32 pm

    Are they now going to manufacture evidence against Trump?

    BTW, when this story first made news, Trump accused the NY AG of demanding a campaign donation in lieu of prosecution. When Trump said “no!”, this lawsuit was made. It appears there may be more than smoke to this matter.

    At this point, Trump is willing to pay millions in defense but not one penny for tribute. I need to find knuckleheads like this to be my clients.

What a surprise, sure Hillary and the Democratic party had nothing to do with this…

Trooper York | April 26, 2016 at 6:05 pm

It shouldn’t be a problem. Trump can always hire a slimy ambulance chasing lawyer to get a bogus delay.

Ted Cruz will be available. It is right up his alley.

    Tyrconnell in reply to Trooper York. | April 26, 2016 at 7:02 pm

    Trump’s ambulance chasers have been getting delays for years, and I don’t really consider someone who has won 5 of 9 before the Supreme Court as a slimy ambulance chaser. But I guess if the freedom of religion, the right to bear arms and having the International Court of Justice rulings declared not binding on American Citizens are slimy to you, well, not much left.

    Ted Cruz argues cases before the United States Supreme Court, and those cases are related to the Constitutional rights of the people of this nation. To state that he is an ambulance chaser is not only grossly ignorant but a complete misrepresentation of the facts. If you are interested in the cases that Cruz has argued, the state’s rights he represents, or the venue in which he has argued them, you can easily find this information via a Google search.

    Ted Cruz is not now and has never been a personal injury or other genre of lawyer oft-considered an “ambulance chaser.” Indeed, the only ambulance Cruz has chased is the one that is rushing the United States Constitution to the ER. And he’s only chased that to defend the Constitution before the Supreme Court of this land.

    Is this clear to you, or do I need to cite and provide links to the cases that Cruz has won before the Supreme Court of these United States?

    It’s one thing to dislike a candidate or to support another, but how dare you make such a disgusting and easily debunked false claim. You belittle yourself and your chosen candidate with such lies and misrepresentations.

Char Char Binks | April 26, 2016 at 6:24 pm

Almost as prestigious as Wharton.

healthguyfsu | April 26, 2016 at 6:25 pm

What kind of moron puts 35k on a credit card for seminars?

Someone dumb enough to think they can seminar their way to mogul status.

    Milhouse in reply to healthguyfsu. | April 26, 2016 at 6:59 pm

    Someone dumb enough to believe Trump, that’s who. And that makes it fraud. Your boyfriend is going down. In June he’ll have to testify in the civil case in California, and now he’ll have to testify in this case as well. In both cases he’ll be in a bind: if he tells the truth he’ll be charged with fraud, and if he lies he’ll be charged with perjury.

      Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | April 26, 2016 at 8:00 pm

      If Donald Ducks had a lick of sense…and ANY of the money the pretends…he’d be settling these claims on the best terms he could negotiate.

      After all, he is “Artee d’Deal”…

      Right?

      healthguyfsu in reply to Milhouse. | April 26, 2016 at 9:28 pm

      Easy there Millie just because I haven’t made up my mind yet doesn’t make me a lover…you’ve got the wrong poster this time, little paladin.

      Sneaky Pete in reply to Milhouse. | April 28, 2016 at 9:43 am

      He’s already been “charged” with fraud. If he tells the truth, he’ll be found LIABLE of fraud.

      Unfortunately, it is exceedingly (and unduly) rare for a witness in a civil case to be charged with perjury.

“I really felt stupid that I was scammed by Trump. I thought that he was really legit,” student Bob Guillo told The Washington Post after putting $34,995 on his American Express card — only to walk away with meaningless certificates of completion and a photo of him with a life-size picture of Trump.
================================================

Just imagine how his voters are gonna feel…

JimMtnViewCaUSA | April 26, 2016 at 7:07 pm

An interesting “inside baseball” look at Cruz vs Trump strategies from an operative who worked at a Cruz PAC.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/what-trump-saw-and-cruz-did-not/article/2002126

conservative tarheel | April 26, 2016 at 7:23 pm

gonna be fun ……

Trump “Feel the Bernie” Madoff is back at it with voters.

The “reputable” universities and several trillion dollars in underperforming debt are next.

A civil suit against a business man who has built and lost many businesses is hardly a story. How many lawsuits do you think GE is fighting at any given time or Goldman Sacks Mr Cruz’s lender of choice(low interest of coarse)? It always amazes me how those who have never built anything of significance can be so critical of those who enter the arena. But then “grasping at straws” doesn’t leave under achievers themselves much of a choice does it?

    spartan in reply to Walter. | April 26, 2016 at 9:39 pm

    Sure … but how many of these businessmen/women are running for POTUS?
    Civil suit for fraud in the middle of a presidential run. Trump can not plead the fifth in a civil case. Trump is about to become his own political nightmare. No one will be able to believe what he says he will do or what he says about his opponents.

      Ragspierre in reply to spartan. | April 27, 2016 at 9:46 am

      Bonus QOTD: “A judge has decided that the Trump University lawsuit will go to trial. This is bad news for Trump as it gives media fodder to the Democrats. The storyline is easy enough — Donald Trump took advantage of the little guy. The lawsuit involves fraud claims that will play right into the Democrats’ hands.

      But the trial is also, through the discovery process, going to reveal things about Trump’s operations and business practices.

      That makes it even more necessary for Donald Trump to release his tax returns now.

      One way or another those returns are going to get out. The Republican Party’s voters and delegates have a right to see what landmines could be lurking there before handing Trump the nomination. The party would already have to deal with the Trump University law suit.” –Erick Erickson
      h/t Doug Ross

      Oh, and anyone can take the 5th in a civil trial. A judge will generally very closely question a witness invoking it, however.

        spartan in reply to Ragspierre. | April 27, 2016 at 10:42 pm

        A couple of things …

        The CA case is the one to watch. That has been certified as a RICO Class Action. This means Trump is liable for treble damages. It is also the one Trump has spent the most on his defense.

        I am pretty sure if the witness does not have the prospect of facing criminal charges, then they can not refuse. I also seem to recall the judge can rule whether the non-answer can be used by the jury to infer intent and purpose.

    Milhouse in reply to Walter. | April 27, 2016 at 3:03 am

    1. Most civil suits are not for fraud; they’re just ordinary business disputes. This was an outright fraud, and it’s likely that after the evidence in the two civil cases is examined Trump will end up facing criminal charges for it.

    2. Cruz’s loan was not low interest. It was at the exact same rate available to anyone else.

      Sneaky Pete in reply to Milhouse. | April 28, 2016 at 10:19 am

      Milhouse, fraud is a common, every day cause of action in civil suits, and I am unaware of any instances in which one found liable for civil fraud has been subsequently charged with criminal fraud. This might end up as an exception, but it is not “likely,” in my opinion (based on 30+ years of civil litigation).

buckeyeminuteman | April 27, 2016 at 7:41 am

Pretty sure the convention is in Cleveland, not Cincinnasty.

Regardless of what was done in the name of the school, turning a federal legal case into a political football, does not reflect well on anyone involved in demeaning the judicial system.
For trump haters, wait until the lovely Mrs. Clinton is either indicted, or there are massive leaks from DOJ/FBI

    Sneaky Pete in reply to Rwgapi. | April 28, 2016 at 10:24 am

    “Demeaning the judicial system?” What are you smoking?

    Have you read the Complaint? I suggest you to. It is eye-opening and eminently legitimate. The case was filed before Trump became a POTUS candidate.

    Federal judges manage their cases on a strict schedule so that lawyers can’t manipulate the schedule and drag things out. This is a complex civil case that has been ongoing for 3 years, and the time for hearing of dispositive motions has arrived. The judge here is scheduling the hearing without ANY regard for Trump’s political schedule, as he should – otherwise, he will be manipulating the schedule for the benefit of one party.

    The litigation is also completely irrelevant to whatever the DOJ/FBI does with Clinton (which is much more likely to be manipulated politically than this case).

Pete or Clarence Darrow. Thanks for the scholarly, but arrogant exposition.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend