A New York appellate judge made two decisions on Friday. One was good news and the other was bad news for former President Donald Trump and his lawyers.
CNN reported on Friday that Associate Justice Peter Moulton of the New York appeals court issued a brief stay that stopped the breakup of a number of Trump-owned businesses. However, he refused to throw out the fraud trial that led to the decision in the first place.
There is a chance that the stay will only last for one month and keep much of Trump’s business operation together.
Trump’s lawyers said that the businesses shouldn’t be broken up because it would be too late to undo some of what had been done if Trump won an appeal against Judge Arthur Engoron’s decision to do so.
On appeal, Trump’s team hopes that at least some of Engoron’s decision will be dropped.
They also hope that some or all of New York Attorney General Letitia James’ case against Trump could be thrown out because of a decision from a court of appeals in June. This decision could be seen as meaning that many of James’ accusations were made too late and could not be used.
According to one of Trump’s lawyers, Christoper Kise, taking action against the companies before those choices are made could hurt at least 1,000 current workers.
“Engoron had ordered Trump to propose potential receivers by October 26, which would begin the process of dissolution,” CNN reported .
“[Engoron] clearly does not comprehend the scope of the chaos its decision has wrought,” Trump’s legal team argued in a court filing Friday before Moulton’s decision.
Some of the private houses that Trump and some of the other suspects live in are owned by limited liability companies that could be affected by Engoron’s decision. Moulton said that this meant that the businesses could be sold off without their residents.
Also, Trump’s team wanted to slow down the trial as a whole, but Moulton didn’t step in on that one.
The plaintiffs claimed that Trump’s attorneys had been unable “to point to any purported irreparable harm from proceeding with a trial that has already begun.” Apparently, Moulton agreed.
James’s lawyers said that if this trial took too long, it could interfere with other cases that are still going on against Trump, which would make it hard to schedule any of them.
“If the trial here is delayed at all, there is a significant risk that defendants will request further delays of trial based on the deadlines in these other cases. Indeed, defendants already appear to be attempting to play one court against the other,” the motion read.
They also said that they had offered to work out a deal with Trump’s lawyers to delay enforcing the order that took away business certificates from many of Trump’s companies, but that Trump’s lawyers wouldn’t talk about it with them.
The people representing James also said that the extra steps the court had to take because of how public the case was would work against any trial delays.
The attorney general’s office noted “special security arrangements outside and inside the courthouse, many additional security and other court personnel to conduct those security arrangements, and special arrangements to ensure access for the press and public,” among the accommodations the court had already had to make.