Judge Arthur Engoron slammed for allegedly receiving unsolicited advice from lawyer in Trump fraud trial

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: Amid a contentious legal battle involving former President Donald Trump, a storm of controversy has erupted following allegations of improper communication between a prominent real estate attorney and Judge Arthur Engoron.

The accusations, which suggest unsolicited advice given to the judge, have prompted the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct to initiate an investigation into potential breaches of judicial ethics.

Adam Leitman Bailey's account

The saga began when Adam Leitman Bailey, a well-known New York real estate lawyer, claimed to have conversed with Judge Engoron approximately three weeks prior to a pivotal ruling in March.

Bailey asserted that during their encounter at the courthouse, he voiced his opinions to Engoron. "I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, 'I need to go.' And I walked over and we started talking. I wanted him to know what I think and why. I really want him to get it right," the lawyer said in mid-February.

According to Bailey, he highlighted to Engoron the importance of rendering a fair judgment considering the potential economic repercussions of imposing a substantial fine on Trump.

He said his motivation stemmed from a broader perspective on the case's impact on New York's economy rather than any personal allegiance to Trump.

Despite his assertions, Bailey disclosed his extensive professional history with Engoron, having litigated before the judge "hundreds of times."

Engoron's spokesperson, Al Baker, denied any impropriety in a statement. "No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr Bailey or any other person. The decision Justice Engoron issued February 16 was his alone, was deeply considered, and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual," said Al Baker.

"Ex parte" refers to a situation where a lawyer and a judge communicate without the presence of other individuals involved in the legal case.

According to the New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct, "a judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers."

However, there is an exception to this rule, which allows judges to seek the advice of a neutral expert who is not involved in the case. Despite the provision, the alleged conversation between Bailey and Engoron has raised concerns about impartiality and adherence to procedural standards.

Perspectives on judicial integrity

Christopher Kise, a member of Trump's defense team and a vocal critic of Engoron, stressed the significance of upholding judicial integrity.

"The code doesn't provide an exception for 'well, this was a small conversation' or 'well, it didn't really impact me' or 'well, this wasn't something that I, the judge, found significant,'" Kise said. "No. The code is very clear."

Following the initial claims made by Bailey, he reiterated in a subsequent interview that while the conversation with Judge Engoron didn't explicitly mention Trump's name, the context left little doubt about the topic. "Obviously we weren't talking about the Mets," Bailey quipped.

As the investigation into the alleged ex parte communication unfolds, the timeline for resolution remains uncertain. The process could span anywhere from several months to over a year, depending on the complexity of the case and the evidence presented, per NBC New York.

Meanwhile, Trump took proactive steps in April to forestall the enforcement of the staggering $454 million judgment against him in his New York civil fraud case. He posted a substantial $175 million bond, effectively halting the state from seizing his assets to satisfy the debt while he pursued an appeal.

The decision to post the bond came after a New York appellate court granted Trump a ten-day window to provide the necessary funds, following a reduction in the required amount by a panel of judges. The bond, essentially a placeholder, serves to guarantee payment if the judgment is upheld upon appeal.

In the event of a favorable outcome for Trump, where the judgment is overturned or significantly reduced, he stands to recoup the bond amount. However, should the ruling stand, the presumptive Republican 2024 presidential nominee will be obligated to pay the state the entire sum, which continues to accrue interest daily.

Social media backlash

Social media was inundated with reactions slamming Judge Engoron following the allegations of improper communication with an outside party.

"He needs to be disbarred!" one posted on X.

"Let's see if there are actually some honest judges left in New York. I'm curious to see how this goes," another chimed in.

"Things are starting to unravel fast now. This is going just how many expected. We will be laughing soon," someone else commented.

"This is going to be very, very hard for Engoron to justify or to then convince them it didn't taint his decision," another offered.

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.