ruby freeman Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

Judge schedules contempt hearing for Giuliani

homesafetytechpros — Sat, 07 Dec 2024 07:49:58 +0000

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani attends a ceremony in Zuccotti Park, organized by the Tunnel to Towers Foundation, on the 19th Anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, New York, NY, September 11, 2020 (Anthony Behar/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images).

A federal judge in Manhattan on Friday ordered Rudy Giuliani to attend a contempt hearing after two Georgia election workers accused him of violating court orders and repeatedly flouting discovery obligations.

On Thursday, Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss asked U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman to hold the former New York City mayor in contempt and impose sanctions.

In a motion and accompanying 22-page memorandum of law, the pair explained how they have lost their patience as they seek to enforce the multimillion-dollar judgment in their defamation case against him.

With due haste – and before Giuliani was able to file a response to the contempt and sanctions request – Liman ordered the parties to attend a civil contempt hearing slated for the morning of Jan. 3, 2025.

The judge also set a briefing schedule – but suggested any motions practice related to the upcoming hearing is optional.

“Defendant shall file a memorandum in response to the motion no later than December 19, 2024,” the court’s terse, one-page order reads. “Plaintiffs may file a memorandum in reply no later than December 27, 2024. Any untimely filings will be disregarded.”

In yesterday’s harshly-worded filing, Freeman and Moss asked for a double whammy of sorts. Their memo says they want Giuliani punished with a contempt finding and concomitant contempt sanction – and separate sanctions related to discovery violations.

More Law&Crime coverage: ‘You are against me!’: Giuliani lashes out at Trump-appointed federal judge in $148 million defamation case

In December 2023, Freeman and Moss won a $148 million default defamation verdict over a campaign against the women in which Giuliani falsely proclaimed the pair were engaged in fraud and had “cheated” voters during the 2020 presidential election.

The pair have since been engaged in various forms of litigation to avail their monetary interests against the onetime federal prosecutor — including a recent series of Requests for Production of Documents (RFPs) aimed at prying away relevant financial information.

The plaintiffs say Giuliani has not been forthcoming — even after two consecutive Liman-issued orders regarding those requests.

Those orders were issued by the court on Oct. 28, and Nov. 22. The first order directed the defendant to expediently reply to discovery requests and set deadlines for such replies. After the first deadline was missed, the court set another deadline for Giuliani to explain himself and avoid being held in contempt. After that second deadline whooshed by, Freeman and Moss asked Liman to step back in.

More Law&Crime coverage: Giuliani likely to be held in contempt for missing filing deadline after telling court it was ‘his main focus right now’

“Mr. Giuliani has not produced a single document in response to Plaintiffs’ discovery orders in this matter notwithstanding multiple orders from this Court requiring him to do so,” the memo reads.

The filing notes some urgency in the request because of an upcoming trial related to a sub-issue in the plaintiffs’ efforts to obtain the money they are owed. Currently, there is a dispute as to whether or not Giuliani established a homestead on his Palm Beach apartment in Florida before the creditors fixed a lien on the property.

Giuliani is scheduled to be deposed on Dec. 27; discovery closes on Dec. 31; the trial is slated for Jan. 16, 2025.

“The Court should not permit Mr. Giuliani to delay accountability, especially in the context of a judgment-enforcement action, which this Court has acknowledged ‘should move quickly’ and not be ‘extended’ or ‘lengthy,”” the Thursday motion reads. “Permitting Mr. Giuliani additional time to obfuscate in response to unambiguous discovery orders — especially when he has not provided any indicia of an attempt to comply — risks jeopardizing an already justifiably compressed time frame.”

Freeman and Moss say they need discovery to help with that case. Not convinced they will receive the requested documents, however, they want the court to sanction Giuliani separately for the discovery violations.

“The Court also should sanction Mr. Giuliani for failing to obey multiple discovery orders,” the motion continues. “Here, severe discovery sanctions are warranted given Mr. Giuliani’s willful flouting of multiple orders of this Court, his history of refusing to participate in discovery even in the face of possible sanctions, and his conscious disregard of the inevitable consequence of his conduct.”

The Freeman-Moss filing argues that there is much to discuss or debate about Giuliani’s discovery-related conduct so far.

“Plaintiffs respectfully suggest that the only colorable issue before the Court is not whether to apply Rule 37 sanctions, but rather what type of sanction to impose,” the motion goes on. “Mr. Giuliani’s conduct necessitates severe sanctions — in particular, adverse inferences and preclusion.”

While pre-hearing motions are technically optional, the judge made clear that the format of the hearing will, in substantial part, be dictated by what the parties choose to submit.

“With their filings in response to the motion for civil contempt, the parties shall indicate whether they wish the Court to hear evidence or testimony on January 3, 2025 and shall submit any physical exhibits they wish the Court to consider in connection with the motion for civil contempt,” the order concludes.

The former federal prosecutor who hitched his wagon to pro-Donald Trump conspiracy theories in the wake of the latter’s 2020 election loss has put himself under increasing legal jeopardy in the defamation case in recent days and weeks.

Late last month, Liman ordered Giuliani to deliver all of the property owed to Freeman and Moss — which the creditors claim was “secreted away” — by Dec. 9, or face the “pain of contempt.”

Giuliani also faces contempt in a D.C.-based case related to claims that he has continued to defame the duo even in defeat.

Source link

The post Judge schedules contempt hearing for Giuliani appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Defamed election workers want Giuliani harshly punished

homesafetytechpros — Fri, 06 Dec 2024 14:47:49 +0000

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani speaks during a news conference outside the federal courthouse in Washington, Friday, Dec. 15, 2023. A jury awarded $148 million in damages to two former Georgia election workers who sued Giuliani for defamation over lies he spread about them in 2020 that upended their lives with racist threats and harassment. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana).

Georgia election workers defamed by Rudy Giuliani are now asking for him to be slapped with “severe sanctions” for allegedly violating several court orders and repeatedly flouting his discovery obligations.

On Thursday, Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss filed a 22-page motion asking U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman to hold the former New York City mayor in civil contempt and harshly punish him to enforce compliance with recent court orders.

Those orders were issued by the court on Oct. 28, and Nov. 22. The first order directed the defendant to expediently reply to discovery requests and set deadlines for such replies. After the first deadline was missed, the court set another deadline for Giuliani to explain himself and avoid being held in contempt. Now, that second deadline has whooshed on by and the plaintiffs have lost their patience.

The plaintiffs say Giuliani has not been forthcoming — even after two consecutive orders regarding those requests.

“Over a week has passed since the Court’s November 26, 2024 deadline—and notwithstanding being on notice that his failure to comply may ‘be punishable by contempt’—Mr. Giuliani has not served any responses or produced any documents in response to the First RFPs, or proffered any explanation for why he should not be held in contempt of the Court’s October 28 Order,” the motion goes on. “Plaintiffs respectfully submit that the time has come for Court to hold Mr. Giuliani in contempt for violating both the October 28 and November 22 Orders, and enter a contempt sanction it finds appropriate.”

While the pair are owed millions of dollars by the onetime federal prosecutor — and they have begun to collect relatively minor but still substantial troves of property and cash to cover the debt — there are currently several extant issues in the case and other related cases.

More Law&Crime coverage: ‘You are against me!’: Giuliani lashes out at Trump-appointed federal judge in $148 million defamation case

A trial in the present case is currently slated for Jan. 16, 2025, to determine whether he established a homestead on his Palm Beach apartment in Florida before the creditors fixed a lien on the property.

Freeman and Moss say they need discovery to help with that aspect of the case. Not convinced they will receive the requested documents, however, they want the court to sanction Giuliani separately for the discovery violations.

In other words, the mother and daughter want the man who defamed them to be punished with contempt, a contempt sanction, and separate sanctions related directly to discovery violations.

The Freeman-Moss filing is not shy with the request; one section is entitled: “Severe Sanctions Are Warranted.”

And the creditors-plaintiffs don’t believe there is much to discuss or debate about Giuliani’s conduct so far.

“Plaintiffs respectfully suggest that the only colorable issue before the Court is not whether to apply Rule 37 sanctions, but rather what type of sanction to impose, ” the motion goes on. “Mr. Giuliani’s conduct necessitates severe sanctions—in particular, adverse inferences and preclusion.”

More Law&Crime coverage: Giuliani likely to be held in contempt for missing filing deadline after telling court it was ‘his main focus right now’

The filing notes some urgency in the request; Giuliani is scheduled to be deposed on Dec. 27; discovery closes on Dec. 31.

“The Court should not permit Mr. Giuliani to delay accountability, especially in the context of a judgment-enforcement action, which this Court has acknowledged ‘should move quickly’ and not be ‘extended’ or ‘lengthy,”” the motion reads. “Permitting Mr. Giuliani additional time to obfuscate in response to unambiguous discovery orders—especially when he has not provided any indicia of an attempt to comply—risks jeopardizing an already justifiably compressed time frame.”

To this end, the plaintiffs also allege that Giuliani’s repeat violation of the court orders may simply be strategic.

Again, the motion, at length:

This homestead dispute arises in the context of judgment enforcement and as such Plaintiffs are entitled to a speedy resolution. As such, Plaintiffs have done everything in their power to move this case forward consistent with the January 16, 2025 trial date. Aware of the expedited schedule, Plaintiffs promptly served document discovery on Mr. Giuliani, subject to the truncated deadlines the Court entered. When Mr. Giuliani failed to comply, Plaintiffs promptly filed the motion to compel. In contrast, Mr. Giuliani has made clear his desire to delay trial. It seems that Mr. Giuliani may be refusing to comply with the Orders in an attempt, at least in part, to force the Court to accept further delay. Mr. Giuliani’s gamesmanship and willful disregard for court orders and the burdens his litigation misconduct has inflicted on the parties and the Court warrant the entry of these severe sanctions.

The man who once went by the name “hizzoner” and then hitched his wagon to pro-Donald Trump conspiracy theories in the wake of the latter’s 2020 election loss, has put himself under increasing legal jeopardy in the defamation in recent days and weeks.

Giuliani also faces contempt in a D.C.-based case related to claims that he has continued to defame the duo even in defeat.

Source link

The post Defamed election workers want Giuliani harshly punished appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Judge hauls Giuliani into court over contempt request

homesafetytechpros — Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:22:43 +0000

Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani arrives at the federal courthouse in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 13, 2023 (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana).

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has ordered Rudy Giuliani to appear for an in-person hearing next month after the two Georgia election workers he defamed requested he be held in contempt of court for allegedly repeating the lies about the 2020 election that resulted in a $148 million judgment against the former New York City mayor.

The motion for civil contempt was filed Wednesday morning after Giuliani made several pleas last week for public donations, saying he couldn’t afford to feed himself as a result of debt he owes to Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell ordered Giuliani to respond to the plaintiffs’ filing by Dec. 2 and appear for an in-person hearing to address the matter on Dec. 12.

According to Freeman and Moss, Giuliani’s defamatory campaign against them continued even after they were awarded the astronomical judgment and Giuliani was forced to declare bankruptcy. To curb Giuliani’s behavior and prevent additional legal action, he eventually consented to a permanent injunction prohibiting him from making any additional claims or statements indicating that the plaintiffs had “engaged in wrong-doing in connection with the 2020 presidential election.”

But the former U.S. Attorney in Manhattan has been “brazenly violating that consent injunction,” plaintiffs’ attorneys say. According to the filing (emphasis in original):

In two recent broadcasts of his nightly show, Mr. Giuliani claimed—unambiguously referring to Plaintiffs—that “they never let me show the tapes that show them quadruple counting the the the ballots,” that his tapes showed Plaintiffs “passing these little uh little hard drives that we maintain were used to fix the machines right and they say it was candy. Well you look at it looks like a hard drive to me and they told me it was a hard drive and there’s no proof that it was candy,” and that “you can see if you want uh in living color her quadruple counting votes and the people uh thrown out of the Arena.” These statements repeat the exact same lies for which Mr. Giuliani has already been held liable, and which he agreed to be bound by court order to stop repeating. They constitute unambiguous violations of the Consent Injunction.

Giuliani’s latest statements about Moss and Freeman “merely regurgitate the exact same lies that Giuliani has been spreading for years” which he explicitly agreed not to repeat, the motion says. Evidence that he violated the court’s injunction is “not just ‘clear and convincing,’ it is overwhelming,” the plaintiffs’ attorney wrote.

In the response due by Dec. 2, Howell ordered Giuliani to address why the motion for contempt should not be granted “given the statements attributed to defendant on November 12 and 14, 2024 during two episodes of his livestream program.” Additionally, Giuliani will be required to recommend “appropriate sanction to coerce defendant’s compliance” with the injunction against continuing to defame Moss and Freeman.

Should Giuliani fail to respond to the motion for contempt, it will be treated as “conceding that motion,” Howell wrote.

Giuliani’s widespread legal troubles have continued to worsen of late. After a federal judge in New York earlier this month shredded the former personal attorney to Donald Trump for his “ridiculous” efforts to keep valuable personal property owed to Freeman and Moss, Giuliani’s attorneys quit without telling him. He has since hired a new attorney in the bankruptcy enforcement case.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Judge hauls Giuliani into court over contempt request appeared first on 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.

Giuliani wants to stop talk of money he is owed by Trump

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 08 Oct 2024 23:41:37 +0000

Former mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani leaves the federal courthouse in Washington on Monday, Dec. 11, 2023 (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana).

Rudy Giuliani is asking a federal judge in New York to stop defamed Georgia election workers from referencing any of the money he may or may not be owed by Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign — at least for another month or so.

In a late Tuesday filing, the former New York City mayor’s attorneys asked U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman to bar Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss from litigating issues related to “Defendant’s alleged claim against the Trump Campaign.”

Giuliani himself previously — during his since-shelved bankruptcy proceedings — raised the $2 million claim against the Trump campaign. Meanwhile, Freeman and Moss raised the claim in the present case — an effort to enforce their defamation case judgment — in late August.

Now, Giuliani wants a preemptive-but-temporary kibosh on any further legal maneuvers related to those alleged arrears.

“The Court, in its discretion, should postpone a turnover of this claim until November 6, 2024, the day after Election Day,” the filing reads.

The pair have since been engaged in various forms of litigation to avail their monetary interests against the onetime federal prosecutor — including legal filings in both bankruptcy courts and district courts. They also recently sued him, again, for defamation.

Tuesday’s filing by Giuliani is stylized as a memorandum of law in opposition to the August effort to enforce the judgment.

While requesting several forms of legal relief, the motivation behind the Trump campaign backpay issue is admittedly about the upcoming presidential election and how the media might make hay out of it.

“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,” the Giuliani memo reads. “Plainly, the value of this claim will not depreciate between now and November 6, 2024.”

Election Day is Nov. 5.

More Law&Crime coverage: ‘Delist’: Judge orders Rudy Giuliani to take NYC apartment off the market after defamed Georgia election workers sound alarm about ‘value-destroying conduct’

The filing also addresses recent efforts by Freeman and Moss that forced Giuliani to “delist” his New York City apartment. This, all but a volte-face, came after the plaintiffs told the court the sale price of his “most valuable single asset” dropped by $525,000.

“For many months, stretching back to the bankruptcy case, Plaintiffs have known about — and supported — Defendant’s efforts to sell this apartment,” the filing explains. “Indeed, as Plaintiffs acknowledge on this motion, the Bankruptcy Court authorized Defendant to retain Sotheby’s as his real estate broker. Plaintiffs, however, now take the position that Defendant does not have the incentive to maximize the sale price. This contention is meritless.”

Rather, Giuliani says, he intends to seek full restitution — of anything paid to Freeman and Moss — by reversing the judgment on appeal. His attorneys argue this means he “has an incentive to maximize the sale price because he has a restitution interest in that price.”

In any event, Giuliani says, the issue should be considered moot. In the filing, he consents to a third-party receiver “to effect the sale of the New York apartment.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Giuliani wants to stop talk of money he is owed by Trump appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.