New York’s attorney general’s office wants to expedite its tax-fraud lawsuit against former President Donald Trump and his three eldest children, and “sets a trial date before the end of 2023.”
Attorney General Letitia James’ office told a New York judge on Thursday it wants “an early preliminary conference” to expeditiously schedule the trial, citing Trump’s allegation of being engaged in an “ongoing scheme” of fraud. Is.
“Given the fact that this action involves allegations of an ongoing scheme and conspiracy to obtain millions of dollars through fraudulent activity, and the defendant has repeatedly sought to delay the conclusion of the OAG investigation “It is imperative that this case proceed quickly,” wrote Kevin Wallace, a senior attorney with the Department of Economic Justice, CNN. In a court filing shared by,
Last week, James filed a $250 million lawsuit against Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump, seeking to bar them from doing business in the state and curtail their access to loans.
“Donald Trump falsely amplified his wealth by billions of dollars to unfairly enrich himself and betray the system that betrayed us all,” James told reporters at the time. لعبة الروليت مجانا
Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba on Wednesday sought to reassign the case to the commercial division of the state court, alleging CNN. Court filings received by That James’ office was trying to “shop justice”.
The case was later assigned to state Supreme Court Justice Arthur Angoron, who previously held Trump in contempt of court for refusing to return documents requested by James. 1xbet.com
James’ office said Thursday that Angoron should remain on the case after the judge spent more than two years “overseeing the conduct of the investigation that led to this enforcement proceeding. العاب قمار روليت ”
Wallace wrote, “Allowing an expedited trial program on an enforcement proceeding after extensive litigation over summons enforcement is precisely the circumstance that warrants placing the matter before Justice Angoron in the interest of the judicial economy.”