Ivanka Trump, the eldest daughter of former President Donald Trump, is contesting attempts to compel her testimony in the ongoing civil fraud trial involving her father and his company. In a recent development reported by Law and Crime on Friday, Ivanka’s attorney has moved to quash three subpoenas issued by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is seeking her testimony in the case.
The motion filed late Thursday argues that Ivanka Trump is “beyond the jurisdiction of this Court,” asserting that she is not a party in the case and does not reside in New York. It further claims that James is attempting to “force her back into this case from which she was dismissed by a unanimous decision of the Appellate Division, First Department” in June.
The civil fraud case, which commenced on October 2, alleges that Donald Trump, along with his sons Eric and Don Jr., and other Trump Organization executives, inflated the value of their assets to secure favorable loans and tax benefits. Attorney General James is seeking $250 million in damages and penalties from the defendants.
Ivanka Trump was initially named as a defendant in the case, but the claims against her were dismissed in June by an appeals court, citing they were “time-barred” and lacked support for any claims post-February 6, 2016. Despite this, James intends to call Ivanka as a witness, citing her relevance to specific properties implicated in the alleged fraud scheme. Subpoenas were issued to three corporate entities allegedly affiliated with Ivanka Trump: TTT, OPO, and 502 Park.
Ivanka Trump’s lawyer contends that these subpoenas are “defective” and “improper,” an attempt to sidestep the court’s jurisdiction and evidence rules. He argues that James never deposed Ivanka Trump during pretrial proceedings and cannot use these entities as a means to compel her testimony. Additionally, he asserts that Ivanka Trump’s testimony is unnecessary, considering the court’s summary judgment order limited the trial to damages and causes of action where her testimony would be irrelevant.
The motion further seeks to strike testimony from Patrick Birney, a Trump Organization executive who claimed that former CFO Allen Weisselberg conveyed Donald Trump’s desire for his net worth to increase on financial statements. The defense argues this statement is hearsay and cannot be assumed true based solely on Birney’s testimony.
As the trial is set to resume with more witnesses from James’ office, it remains uncertain whether the court will rule on Ivanka Trump’s motion before proceedings recommence. The trial’s duration is undetermined, contingent on the number of witnesses and evidence presented, potentially extending over several weeks or months.
