International Courant
Trump had sought a brand new trial after a $5 million judgment towards him.
A federal decide in New York on Wednesday denied former President Donald Trump’s request for a brand new trial within the defamation and battery case introduced by E. Jean Carroll that resulted in a $5 million injury award.
Trump had sought a brand new trial after a New York jury in Might discovered him answerable for sexually assaulting the previous Elle journal columnist in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room within the Nineteen Nineties, then defaming her in a 2022 Fact Social publish by calling her allegations “a Hoax and a lie.”
Decide Lewis Kaplan denied the request, saying, “The jury on this case didn’t attain ‘a critically inaccurate end result.'”
“Its verdict will not be ‘a miscarriage of justice,'” the decide stated.
In rendering its verdict in Might, the jury held Trump answerable for battering Carroll, however didn’t discover that he raped her as alleged, as a substitute holding him answerable for sexual assault. Jury members awarded Carroll damages of $2 million in compensatory damages and $20,000 in punitive damages for battery, in addition to $1 million in damages, $1.7 million for popularity restore, and $280,000 in punitive damages, for defamation.
E. Jean Carroll reacts as she exits the Manhattan Federal Court docket following the decision within the civil rape accusation case towards former U.S. President Donald Trump, in New York Metropolis, Might 9, 2023.
Brendan Mcdermid/Reuters, FILE
“The Court docket ought to order a brand new trial on damages or grant remittitur as a result of opposite to Plaintiff’s declare of rape, the Jury discovered that she was not raped however was sexually abused by Defendant through the 1995/1996 Bergdorf Goodman incident,” Trump’s attorneys argued of their bid for a brand new trial.
“Such abuse may have included groping of Plaintiffs breasts by clothes or related conduct, which is a far cry from rape,” Trump’s attorneys stated. “Subsequently, an award of $2 million for such conduct, which admittedly didn’t trigger any recognized psychological damage to Plaintiff, is grossly extreme underneath the relevant case legislation.”
