Allegations of a potential conflict of interest have emerged in the defamation case against former President Donald Trump. Alina Habba, Trump’s lawyer, has raised concerns about the relationship between Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan and Roberta Kaplan, the lawyer representing E. Jean Carroll, the plaintiff in the case.
According to a report by the New York Post, Judge Kaplan and Roberta Kaplan worked together at the same law firm in the early 1990s. While unrelated, an unnamed source claimed that the judge was once Roberta Kaplan’s mentor.
Habba, in a letter to the judge, expressed her concerns regarding the alleged relationship between the judge and Carroll’s lawyer. She argued that if there was indeed a mentor-mentee relationship, it should have been disclosed before the case proceeding. Habba also highlighted the connection between Judge Kaplan and Shawn Crowley, one of Carroll’s lead counsel, who had previously served as the judge’s law clerk and had their wedding co-officiated by him.
The revelations about the alleged relationship between Judge Kaplan and Carroll’s legal team have raised questions about the impartiality of the court proceedings. Habba suggested that the judge displayed preferential treatment towards Carroll’s counsel and was overtly hostile towards the defense counsel and President Trump. She emphasized that the recent damages trial and the defamation case tried last year were marked by clashes between Judge Kaplan and the defense counsel.
Habba stated that without further information or a specific denial from Judge Kaplan regarding the mentor-mentee relationship, it is challenging to determine the appropriate course of action. However, she hinted at the possibility of seeking new trials on the issues of liability and damages.
These allegations add a new layer of complexity to the already contentious defamation case against Donald Trump. The potential conflict of interest raises concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the legal proceedings. As the case progresses, it remains to be seen how these allegations will impact the outcome and whether any actions will be taken to address the perceived conflict of interest.
