Lawyers for CBS say they plan to demand that President Donald Trump — who is allegedly letting DOGE pillage U.S. treasury data, according to multiple lawsuits — fork over his own personal finance information to the network, should he follow through with his $20 billion lawsuit against it over a Kamala Harris “60 Minutes” interview from last year, which he claims was deceptively “doctored.”

“Defendants believe discovery is needed into President Trump’s personal financials, as well as the financials of Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign organizations and of Trump Media & Technology Group, including with respect to Truth Social and the $TRUMP meme crypto project,” wrote CBS lawyers in a joint proposed scheduling order filed Tuesday in the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division, where Trump and Texas Rep. Ronny Jackson, a Republican who previously served as Trump’s White House doctor, are suing the network for being “deceived and misled” by the October 2024 interview.

“Defendants further anticipate that discovery will be needed into President Trump’s legal relationship, if any, with the Donald J. Trump for President 2024 campaign and the Trump Media & Technology Group,” the scheduling order adds.

More from Law&Crime: ‘Clear bias and prejudice against the president’: Lawmaker files articles of impeachment against SDNY judge who blocked DOGE from accessing sensitive government data

Trump’s lawsuit against CBS stems from two “60 Minutes” clips of Harris answering a question about the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in the Middle East. His suit claims the network edited the vice president’s response to make her more appealing to voters and to avoid “one of Harris’ most embarrassing weaknesses,” which it claims was “her habit of uttering ‘word salads’ — i.e., jumbles of exceptionally incoherent speech that drew disapproval even from dyed-in-the-wool Democratic commentators.” The suit says CBS was “looking to profit from manufactured enthusiasm for Harris” by using allegedly “doctored” footage, which they claim was an “unethical and unlawful” attempt to “sabotage a Republican presidential candidate” and “tip the scales” in favor of Democrats ahead of the 2024 election.

Earlier this month, Trump amended his complaint and added a new claim of “unfair competition,” as well as Rep. Jackson as his co-plaintiff after receiving pushback from CBS lawyers for filing the lawsuit in Texas. Trump’s lawyers say editing the Harris interview ultimately violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA). CBS alleges that Trump was simply “judge shopping” when choosing the Lone Star State, as he lives in Florida and CBS is based in New York. The network had motioned to dismiss the Trump suit on account of this in prior court filings, which led Trump to add Jackson in response.

The judge overseeing the case, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk — a Trump appointee — is the lone federal judge in Amarillo. CBS has argued in court filings that both the federal Lanham Act and Texas statute only govern commercial speech and not political or editorial speech. In a Dec. 6 motion to dismiss, the network’s lawyers noted how Trump’s original complaint “over and over admits that it challenges editorial decision-making, not commercial speech or advertising.” The network has pointed to the complaint’s description of “Face the Nation” — which promoted the Harris interview — as a “morning news show,” referring repeatedly to “news distortion” and alleging that CBS engaged in “deceitful, deceptive manipulation of news” or “rigging or slanting [of] the news,” according to the court filings.

“There can be no serious argument that President Trump’s claim arises out of commercial speech, as required for a viable DTPA claim,” the network’s lawyers argued in motion this month. “For this reason alone, the action fails.”

On Tuesday, the CBS legal team said discovery would likely be needed to address multiple issues that come to mind for them related to Trump’s lawsuit and its allegations against the network.

“Discovery is also needed into, inter alia, whether Plaintiffs have purchased goods or services from Defendants (and whether Rep. Jackson agreed to arbitrate claims relating to CBS’ services); what confusion (if any) was created by the interview and actions taken in connection with such confusion; whether Plaintiffs relied upon any alleged misrepresentation in taking any action or failing to take any action; and the basis for the damages alleged,” the scheduling order says.

More from Law&Crime: ‘Most consequential data breach in U.S. history’: Musk-led DOGE takeover of Treasury systems presents ‘national security threats,’ lawsuit says

Trump’s suit originally demanded that CBS and Paramount Global — the network’s parent company — cough up $10 billion for the Harris interview, which he now calls “an act of unfair competition” and “unfair advantage” against his Truth Social network under the Lanham Act, in addition to unlawful “election and voter interference.” Trump is also claiming that CBS falsely advertised the interview with a preview for it during an episode of “Face the Nation” last fall.

“Defendants’ deceptive advertising and ‘slice-and-dice’ manipulation of the Interview was also an act of unfair competition against President Trump, a significant owner of shares in publicly traded company Trump Media & Technology Group Corp,” the amended complaint says. “TMTG owns President Trump’s wildly popular social media platform Truth Social, in which President Trump owns a substantial share, and which is one of Defendants’ competitors in the broadcast, online, and digital media content creation spaces.”

Being injured in an accident is stressful enough, but dealing with the financial aftermath can make things even harder. Between medical bills, missed work, and the toll it takes on your life, it’s natural to wonder what kind of compensation you might be entitled to.

Now, here’s the multi-million dollar question: how do you go about calculating a fair personal injury settlement? The truth is, there’s no one-size-fits-all formula. Simply put, it’s handled on a case-by-case basis. What you can do is look at multiple aspects of the injury and its impact on your life. Let’s go into it:

Understand the Types of Personal Injury Cases

Personal injury cases cover a wide range of situations. The specifics of your case will play a big role in how your settlement is determined. You might be dealing with:

Motor Vehicle Accident

Car accidents are one of the most common personal injury claims. Settlement depends heavily on fault and insurance coverage. Typically, the at-fault party’s insurance covers the damages, but the amount you receive depends on the severity of your injuries.

Slip and Fall

These accidents usually happen on someone else’s property due to negligence, such as wet floors with no sign or broken stairs. Proving liability is critical here; you’ll need to show that the property owner knew about the hazard and didn’t take action to fix it.

In these situations, your medical records and any evidence of negligence can be pivotal. The total costs of medical treatment, rehabilitation, and lost wages will help determine your settlement.

Workplace Injuries

Workplace injuries can arise from various scenarios—falls, equipment malfunctions, or exposure to harmful substances. These cases usually involve worker’s compensation claims, which provide financial support to employees injured on the job.

In these cases, calculating settlements often consider medical expenses, lost wages, and disability. If your injuries affect your long-term ability to work, that can significantly increase your settlement value.

This is just the start of calculating your claims, so finding the best personal injury lawyer for your case in Queens, such as Davidoff Law or one in your local area, should be a top priority. Law experts will help you navigate the legal maze and give you an estimate of what your settlement might look like. Their main goal is to have your back and look out for your best interests every step of the way!

Assess Your Damages

Next up is figuring out exactly what your damages are. Essentially, they’re generally divided into economic and non-economic categories. Let’s take a closer look at them:

Economic Damages

These are the tangible, out-of-pocket costs associated with your injury. They’re easier and straightforward to calculate because they come with receipts and clear financial records.

Economic damages include:

• Medical cost: This includes all the expenses related to your injury, from the initial hospital visit to ongoing treatments like physical therapy or medication. If you’ve had surgery or expect to need long-term care, those future expenses also count. It’s also best to consider any potential complications that might arise from your injury as well.
• Lost salary: If your injury caused you to miss work, you can claim the income you would have earned during that time. This covers the days, weeks, or even months you’ve been unable to work. If you’re still recovering, your settlement might also account for future lost wages.
• Property damage: If your personal property was damaged in an accident, like your vehicle, you can include repair or replacement costs in your settlement. This is often overlooked but can make a significant difference.

Make sure you’ve compiled all the documents and evidence related to these economic damages to support your claim effectively.

Non-Economic Damages

Now, here’s where things get a little more subjective. Non-economic damages cover the emotional and physical impact the injury has had on your life. Here are some examples:

• Pain and suffering: This refers to the physical pain or discomfort you may have endured due to your injury. Unlike medical bills, there’s no set number attached to this, so it’s often calculated using a multiplier method (more on that in a bit).
• Loss of enjoyment of life: If your injury has limited your ability to enjoy hobbies or activities, this can be considered in your settlement. For instance, if you’re an avid runner but are now unable to jog due to an accident, that loss can be compensated.
• Disfigurement: If your injury has caused visible scars or amputations, you may be entitled to damages for the emotional and social effects. The psychological burden of living with a disfigurement could deeply impact self-esteem.

Non-economic damages have so much weight on your living experience. They truly capture how the injury has affected your well-being beyond just the financial aspects.

As you can see, recognizing the tangible costs and the emotional toll your injury has taken will better equip you to negotiate a fair settlement.

Know How Fault Impacts Your Settlement

Not every accident is cut and dry, and sometimes, both parties share some degree of blame. This is where comparative negligence comes in. In many states, the amount you receive in your settlement could be reduced depending on the percentage of fault you hold.

For example, if you were 20% at fault for a car accident, your total settlement might be reduced by 20%. So, if the final compensation were initially USD$50,000, you’d walk away with USD$40,000.

Just take note that different states handle faults differently. So, it’s best to know how your state’s laws work in case you’re partially responsible.

Takeaway

Calculating a personal injury settlement isn’t an exact science. Every case has its unique circumstances that can influence the outcome. What you need to do is to work with a lawyer who knows the ins and outs of the legal process. With the right help, you can get through this and come out okay on the other side.

Members of the editorial and news staff of Law&Crime were not involved in the creation of this content.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Personal injury firm sues TD Bank after loss…

Law Firms

Personal injury firm sues TD Bank after loss in fraud scheme

By Debra Cassens Weiss

August 29, 2024, 12:19 pm CDT

A personal injury law firm has filed a lawsuit blaming TD Bank for its loss of about $146,000 in a check fraud scam.

The July 23 suit, removed to New Jersey federal court Monday, alleges that TD Bank should have warned New Jersey firm Nagel Rice about the cashier’s check that it deposited from a bank called BBVA because of a history of fraudulent checks claiming to be drawn from that institution.

Law.com has the story.

According to the suit, Nagel Rice received a cashier’s check for $148,950 from a purported client supposedly drawn from BBVA and deposited it in the firm’s account with TD Bank on Nov. 23, 2020. About two days later, Nagel Rice wired $146,250 to the bank account of the purported client.

On Dec. 1, 2020, Nagel Rice received a letter in regular mail from TD Bank dated Nov. 25, 2020. The letter advised Nagel Rice that the cashier’s check had bounced. Nagel Rice lost the entire amount wired to the client.

The suit alleges that the bank was negligent because of its failure to warn, and it violated a contractual banking relationship in which it agreed to safeguard Nagel Rice accounts.

Law.com described Nagel Rice as a high-profile personal injury firm that has many top verdicts and settlements in a list published by the New Jersey Law Journal.

Many other firms have lost money in similar scams, including several in New Jersey. The FBI warned about such scams in 2010, telling lawyers to beware of cients who make contact only by email, especially if they reside in foreign countries.

In one version of the scam, a purported client wants help collecting a debt, but the matter is quickly settled and the firm receives a phony check for the settlement money. The firm keeps a fee and wires the rest to the supposed client, only to find out later that the check has bounced.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyers’ ‘barrage of personal attacks’ on…

Trials & Litigation

Lawyers’ ‘barrage of personal attacks’ on opponents started with tissue-box toss, appeals court says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 14, 2024, 12:02 pm CDT

Updated: A federal appeals court saw a need for a civility lesson when it granted a new trial to a civil-fraud plaintiff because of a “barrage of personal attacks” made by opposing lawyers in a closing argument.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans said lawyers Stephen A. Khoury of Dallas and C. Gregory Shamoun of Farmers Branch, Texas, had “employed nearly every category of what we have previously held to be improper closing argument.”

Bloomberg Law has coverage of the March 8 opinion.

The personal attacks targeted the opposing lawyer, Andrew W. Mychalowych, and the civil-fraud plaintiff he represented, David Clapper, the appeals court said in the per curiam opinion.

When beginning the closing argument, Shamoun threw a box of tissues at Mychalowych, stating: “I know y’all have a potentiality of crying, y’all might need Kleenex.”

Later, Shamoun said that if Mychalowych had accused him of perjury on the street, rather than in the courtroom, he would have “kicked his butt.” If the opposing lawyer was his child, Shamoun said, he would have “spanked” him for asking so many leading questions.

Shamoun told jurors that Mychalowych defied the judge’s instructions, tried to hide evidence (a reference to misrepresentation of an exhibit), and treated everyone at the trial with disrespect.

“Judge had to scold him,” Shamoun said. “I have never seen anything like this in the over 30 years that I have practiced in this town. Never have I seen what y’all witnessed. I am embarrassed for the profession, ma’am. I’m embarrassed.”

For his part, Khoury implied that Mychalowych had paid a witness to testify, a comment that he later walked back. He also referred to a plaintiff’s expert witness as a “paid prostitute from Michigan” and called the opposing lawyer “deceitful and deceptive.”

The arguments also included personal attacks on the plaintiff, the 5th Circuit said.

Shamoun characterized Clapper as a “‘billionaire’ with a 70-foot yacht who was going after the estate” of a man who had recently died, leaving behind a widow and six children. The plaintiff’s case, Shamoun said, was “insulting to everybody’s intelligence” and “insulting to everybody’s position as a juror.”

Shamoun said he hoped that anyone who could “drum up a lawsuit like Clapper’s” would “understand that they are going to meet their maker,” and that Clapper is not credible.

“He can cry, cry like he did in the first trial, he can cry like he did here,” Shamoun said. “I’m not going to tell you, I don’t like him because it don’t matter what I do or what I don’t. But he’s not a credible person.”

Khoury, meanwhile, called Clapper a “financial pimple.” And both lawyers mentioned several times that Clapper was from Michigan while also suggesting that “people from Michigan have lower moral standards,” the appeals court said.

Khoury did not immediately respond to the ABA Journal’s requests for comment made in phone messages and emails.

Shamoun responded to the Journal’s comment request by forwarding the defendants’ motion for sanctions against the plaintiff and his attorneys, filed in June 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr’s August 2023 ruling on the request.

“The attached orders say all one needs to know,” Shamoun’s executive assistant, Tatum Gonzales, said in relaying Shamoun’s message to the Journal.

Starr denied sanctions but said the plaintiffs’ “bad-faith conduct permeated this suit,” justifying the payment of more than $2.5 million in attorney fees to the defendants. Starr cited some instances, without specifying which of the plaintiffs’ lawyers were responsible for the conduct.

Starr said the plaintiffs’ counsel continued to explore an issue that was off-limits because of a privilege ruling. In addition, the plaintiffs’ counsel “repeatedly testified for witnesses,” leading to reprimands from the judge. And the plaintiffs’ counsel designated 699 exhibits and 63 witnesses for trial, even though Starr had given each side only 24 hours to present the case. As a result, the defendants had to analyze and respond to each exhibit.

The 5th Circuit used the last section of its opinion to review attempts to impose civility in law practice.

The appeals court noted that a precursor version of the current ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct had criticized the view that lawyers have a duty to do whatever it takes to win. The U.S. Supreme Court also commented in a 1935 opinion that while a lawyer “may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones.”

In the 1980s, “Rambo” litigation tactics became a concern, leading the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to adopt a civility standard in 1988 for lawyers in civil actions. It included a “duty of courtesy and cooperation” owed to the opposing counsel.

“Effective advocacy does not require antagonistic or obnoxious behavior,” one of the tenets said.

The Texas Supreme Court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopted a lawyer’s creed the next year calling for courtesy, candor and cooperation in lawyer-to-lawyer dealings.

The authors of the 5th Circuit opinion are Chief Judge Priscilla Richman, an appointee of former President George W. Bush; Judge Patrick Higginbotham, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan; and Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, also an appointee of Bush.

“We recognize that such unprofessional practices as those that occurred in this case continue to appear in our courtrooms, despite many attempts to eradicate such practices,” the 5th Circuit said. “We remind all practitioners in our court that zealous advocacy must not be obtained at the expense of incivility.”

The case is Clapper v. American Realty Investor Inc.

Updated March 14 at 1:04 p.m. to include the response from C. Gregory Shamoun’s executive assistant, Tatum Gonzales, and to report on the June 2021 motion for sanctions and U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr’s August 2023 ruling.