control Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

Election workers demand control over Giuliani’s Trump fees

homesafetytechpros — Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:11:43 +0000

Members of then President Donald Trump’s legal team, including former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani, left, Sidney Powell, and Jenna Ellis, speaking, attend a news conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters, Thursday Nov. 19, 2020, in Washington (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin).

Defamed election workers in Georgia are still brawling with Rudy Giuliani in court as they attempt to collect as much of their $148 million judgment as possible in property, including $2 million in “never paid” legal fees stemming from Giuliani’s ill-fated 2020 election lawyering for Donald Trump and his campaign.

Lead plaintiff Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss in August asked a federal court to order Giuliani to “turn over personal property in his possession” and to appoint them as “receivers with the power to take possession of, and sell, both real and personal property that Mr. Giuliani does not turn over,” like his New York apartment and his Florida condo.

At the time, Freeman and Moss cited Giuliani’s under oath testimony in his since dismissed bankruptcy case that he was “owed ‘about two million dollars’ by the Trump 2020 Presidential Campaign (the ‘Trump 2020 Campaign’) and/or the Republican National Committee for his work following the 2020 presidential election.” They demanded that the fee claim be turned over to them.

Left: Shaye Moss. Right: Ruby Freeman, during Jan. 6 Committee testimony (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File).

Giuliani responded in early October that he was concerned about timing — so close to the 2024 election — and optics.

“The Court, in its discretion, should postpone a turnover of this claim until November 6, 2024, the day after Election Day,” Giuliani requested, later warning that the media would make it seem like he had turned on Trump.

“Plaintiffs will or may use this assignment for an improper, political (or, at least, collateral) purpose, creating the confusing, and inaccurate, appearance that Defendant is now somehow suing candidate Trump, thereby generating an accompanying, and unnecessary, media frenzy,” his opposition filing argued. “Plainly, the value of this claim will not depreciate between now and November 6, 2024.”

On Friday, Freeman and Moss replied that there was “no merit” to Giuliani’s concerns about timing and appearances. The plaintiffs, therefore, demanded that Giuliani’s “control over this legal claim should be severed immediately.”

“There is no merit to Defendant’s objection. The ‘appearance’ that a judgment debtor is seeking repayment of an outstanding debt for the benefit of creditors is not a meaningful reason to withhold relief under CPLR § 5225 or §5228, and Mr. Giuliani cites no authority to the contrary,” the plaintiffs said. “If anything, Mr. Giuliani’s unwillingness to appear adverse to former President Trump or his campaign further underscores that Mr. Giuliani cannot be trusted to monetize or even preserve the value of this claim for his creditors.”

Freeman and Moss added that it will be “abundantly clear” who is suing whom.

“In any litigation with respect to the Legal Fee Claim—including in the event any such litigation is commenced prior to November 6, 2024—Plaintiffs would bring such litigation in their capacity as receivers for, or as assignees of, Mr. Giuliani’s interest in the claim, and would make that status abundantly clear both in the case caption and in the body of any complaint,” the filing said. “No reasonable observer would misinterpret such a filing as a suit by Mr. Giuliani against former President Trump, the 2020 Trump Campaign, or any other party.”

The Trump legal claim aside, plaintiffs are apparently open to the idea that neither New York Yankees World Series rings nor a watch that belonged to Giuliani’s grandfather will be subject to collection.

As Law&Crime noted recently, Giuliani’s son Andrew Giuliani filed documents claiming that the rings are his and have been since 2018, when his father gifted them to him.

Freeman and Moss are asking the judge to let discovery play out and for the younger Giuliani to sit for a deposition on the rings, perhaps ahead of November, before a ruling is issued on “turnover or receivership.”

The plaintiffs are taking a similar approach with Giuliani’s grandfather’s watch.

“As a gesture of good faith, Plaintiffs are prepared to recognize that exemption with respect to Mr. Giuliani’s grandfather’s watch, if he is able to produce satisfactory evidence showing that the watch”s value does not exceed the $1,000 exemption limit,” the filing said. “If ongoing negotiations do not resolve this issue, the Court should order that the watch be taken into receivership pending Mr. Giuliani’s production of such satisfactory evidence of value.”

Could all of this largely end up being much ado about nothing? In the words of the plaintiffs, maybe [emphasis ours]:

On October 15, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a consent letter motion, apprising the Court that Plaintiffs and Defendant are discussing a proposal that may, if successful, moot any remaining disputes raised in Defendant’s opposition to the Motion to Enforce Judgment. Those negotiations are ongoing, and by filing their reply brief today, Plaintiffs do not intend to convey to the Court that the negotiations referred to in their prior letter-motion have concluded without success; instead, Plaintiffs have filed their reply brief in support of the Motion to Enforce Judgment consistent with the Court’s deadline of October 19, 2024. Plaintiffs will file a status report by the end of the day on October 22, 2024, updating the Court of the status of those negotiations.

Giuliani’s camp has said that the judgment enforcement action was designed to “censor and bully” him and to “harass and intimidate” from exercising his First Amendment rights.

Read the reply in support of enforcing the judgment here.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Election workers demand control over Giuliani’s Trump fees appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

The Murdoch family fight for control over a media dynasty

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:32:19 +0000

Rupert Murdoch, center, and his wife Elena Zhukova Murdoch arrive at the Second Judicial District Court in Reno, Nev., Monday Sept. 16, 2024. (AP Photo/Andy Barron)

Headlines have been circulating in recent weeks about an ongoing legal battle between a high-profile media mogul and his children for control over the patriarch’s news empire — but no, the hit HBO series “Succession” is not back for another season.

The courtroom showdown involving Rupert Murdoch and four of his children is, in fact, all too real. Late last year, Murdoch made a change to the irrevocable Murdoch Family Trust, which was set up in 1999 to transition Murdoch’s vast media holdings, now consisting of News Corp and Fox Corporation, to the control of Murdoch’s four eldest children, each of whom would have an equal vote, upon his death. News Corp oversees such powerful media entities as the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal, while Fox Corporation is home to conservative juggernauts Fox News and Fox Business.

In a shocking twist, Murdoch changed the trust in 2023 to convert control of the vast entity to his eldest son Lachlan — much to the surprise of remaining siblings Prudence, Elisabeth and James, who opposed the change and sought to challenge it in court. Although the trust is irrevocable, the Nevada probate commissioner found in June that Murdoch could amend the trust if he is able to show he did so in good faith and for the sole benefit of his heirs.

Two additional Murdoch children, youngest daughters Grace and Chloe, do not have voting rights in the trust.

The trial kicked off Sept. 16 in probate court in Nevada. The children Murdoch tried to cut from the trust undoubtedly are seeking a favorable result in court, while the public, the legal world, and the media in general are left with more questions than answers. How will the court rule, now that oral arguments have reportedly concluded? What will this mean for the future of all the entities under the trust’s control? And finally, what impact will this result have on the media world in general?

The Murdoch family battle played out in downtown Reno. The state where the trust was created, Nevada, is known for providing more privacy and having favorable probate laws — perhaps the reason why Murdoch wanted the Silver State to have jurisdiction. The trial was closed to the media, yet a coalition of high-profile outlets such as CNN and the New York Times, which first revealed the change to the trust in July and the ongoing battle that followed, have filed motions to obtain access to the proceedings. They have cited the potentially massive impact this ruling would have not just on the Murdoch family, but on the multiple outlets owned by News Corp that have readers and viewers numbering in the millions. The matter is now before the Nevada Supreme Court, which may ultimately decide whether the court filings should be made public.

On Sept. 12, a federal judge rejected a majority of the outlets’ arguments and only allowed a few details about the case to be made public. As a result, the public has not been granted much insight into what evidence has been presented, what testimony has been given, or what potential way the court will rule. Yet one thing the public knows is that the key question the presiding probate commissioner will be focusing on is whether Murdoch was acting in good faith and for the benefit of his heirs when he made the change to the trust. One potential reason behind the change that some outlets have proposed is that Murdoch was allegedly attempting to ensure his media empire — and particularly Fox News — would still maintain its right-leaning viewpoints, as Lachlan, the son Murdoch named as successor to the trust, has been deemed more conservative than his siblings.

How the court will rule remains to be seen, but in the meantime, one must ask: What is at stake in the ultimate ruling?

The ruling would likely impact the overall viewpoint and editorial balance of News Corp and Fox Corporation and the companies the own, particularly Fox News — and such a change would affect the content and way those entities deliver that content to its viewers. Moreover, given the significant following Fox News has in terms of viewership, especially regarding politically-focused news, the change in the trust could possibly lead to real political outcomes, particularly given the upcoming 2024 presidential election. Finally, no matter what the ultimate decision the commissioner will render in this case, there is no doubt that this decision will be used as precedent by the heads of other media entities seeking to alter ownership or structure in leadership. One alteration in the Murdoch Family Trust could possibly significantly change the way numerous media entities work, the type of news they deliver everyday to the public, and critical decisions their followers make, including who they vote for, how they contribute to their communities, and what causes they support.

Access to the proceedings could also have an impact on the response to its outcome. Journalism and a free press are critical to a free society, and media organizations have sometimes stepped in to achieve justice where other industries cannot. In 2017, for example, an undercover investigation regarding sexual assault allegations against Harvey Weinstein sparked the MeToo movement and ultimately resulted in his conviction for sexual assault; a 2002 story by The Boston Globe featuring results of an investigation into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church led to prosecutions of five Catholic priests in Boston; and, ironically, in July 2009, Nick Davies, a reporter for The Guardian, broke a story revealing UK tabloid News of the World — which was owned by Murdoch — had apparently engaged in phone hacking to report some of its stories. The tabloid ended up folding in 2011.

The stakes for the Murdoch probate matter are high, given the crucial role the media plays in breaking news and the industry’s impact on society as a whole. Now that the legal battle has concluded — playing out entirely behind closed doors — all that’s left is to wait for the judge’s ruling.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post The Murdoch family fight for control over a media dynasty appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.