(NationalUSNews.com) — Attorney Adam Leitman Bailey is claiming to have had a conversation with the judge in former President Trump’s Manhattan civil fraud trial three weeks before it commenced.
From what Bailey says, he seems to have offered unsolicited advice about a law at issue in the case. This may not seem strange to people unfamiliar with the concept of ex parte conversations. This term describes when a person, usually a party to a legal proceeding, has a conversation with a judge, juror, or other person involved in a legal case. Specifically, this would be a conversation that takes place without the knowledge or presence of the other party indicated in the legal proceedings. Ex parte conversations have traditionally been considered improper in legal situations.
Bailey says he’s a big fan of the judge, Arthur F. Engoron and wanted him to “get it right”. He says he wasn’t sure if the judge was applying the law properly, so he took the opportunity to talk with him. He wanted to express what he thought and why regarding the case. The New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct address ex parte conversations clearly. The rules prohibit initiating or even considering them outside the presence of the involved parties or their lawyers. A small exception for seeking advice from a disinterested expert is allowed but requires notification of the parties as well as giving them a chance to respond.
Trump’s lawyer, Chris Kise, has suggested that if it is true that Judge Engoron discussed the case with Bailey as he described it, it could call into question the integrity of the entire case. A court spokesman for Engoron indicated that the judge believes no impropriety has taken place and says he was “wholly uninfluenced” by Bailey. Kise claims that the code does not include allowances for whether the people having the conversation felt it was insignificant. Bailey, who is not a fan of Donald Trump, has denied that either he or the judge broke any rules.
Kise is requesting that Judge Engoron recuse himself, saying that he does not believe that this conversation with Bailey was an isolated incident. There is some speculation that the New York judicial watchdog organization, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC), will be investigating the incident. The SCJC investigations are conducted under a strict confidentiality statute so they cannot comment on the issue. These investigations can last for months or even more than a year.
Copyright 2024, NationalUSNews.com
