New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who ordered the $454 million penalty on former President Donald Trump in his civil fraud case, approved on July 9 the subpoena of Adam Leitman Bailey. Bailey, an attorney, had asserted that he provided advice to the judge before the ruling was made.
“The subpoena is not wholly without merit,” wrote Justice Engoron in a July 9 order, granting Mr. Bailey’s request that the subpoena be narrowed but denying the motion to quash it in its entirety.
Mr. Bailey was ordered to share with defendants the subpoenaed materials within seven days.
Trump’s legal team had requested a subpoena for Mr. Bailey regarding his interactions with the judge, arguing that Mr. Bailey’s public statements suggest the judge might have been influenced or improperly consulted outside parties regarding the case.
The New York attorney general’s office filed a lawsuit against former President Trump and other executives of the Trump Organization in 2022, accusing them of fraudulently inflating his net worth.
The case was decided earlier this year in favor of the attorney general. Former President Trump, who has denied any wrongdoing, is currently appealing the verdict.
Hallway Conversation
During an interview broadcast on February 16, the same day Justice Engoron delivered his ruling, Mr. Bailey told NBC News that several weeks earlier he had encountered Justice Engoron in the courthouse hallway and discussed the statutes applied in the high-profile case.
“I don’t think this judge is applying the law properly and I’m a big fan of this judge,” Adam Leitman Bailey told the reporter. “I really wanted him to get it right.”
Mr. Bailey said the judge had “a lot of questions” and Mr. Bailey “gave him everything I knew.”
Mr. Bailey stated that he did not mention “Donald Trump,” and a court spokesperson at that time released a statement denying any suggestion of impropriety.
“No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr. Bailey or any other person,” court spokesperson Al Baker told media outlets.
Mr. Bailey, a prominent real estate attorney, had previously discussed the case in multiple interviews with various media outlets before prior to the interview mentioned before.
Justice Engoron ruled that by speaking publicly about the alleged hallway conversation, “Mr. Bailey has opened the door by making extraordinary claims to the media, in which he, by his own admission, stated that he attempted to offer unsolicited legal advice to the Court.”
“According, defendants are entitled to any communications or documents in Mr. Bailey’s possession that involve, discuss, or in any way refer to ‘the Action,’ as defined in the subpoena,” the order reads.
Trump attorneys had filed a motion to subpoena all communications and documents between Mr. Bailey and the court, as well as all communications and documents regarding the hallway interaction.
Attorneys for Mr. Bailey argued the subpoena was far too broad, and must be narrowed to only materials related to the hallway interaction.
Share your thoughts by scrolling down to leave a comment.
