On January 26, a jury in Manhattan returned a verdict in favor of advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in her second defamation trial against former US President Donald Trump. Under Rule 62, the 30-day automatic stay of judgment began when the court entered its judgment on February 8. Unless Trump posts a bond of 110% of the judgment amount, $91.6 million, by March 9, or successfully stays the bond requirement, Carroll can begin collecting.
Only on Saturday did Trump finally file a motion asking the court for an unsecured stay of the execution of the judgment, asking to post a bond in a fraction of the judgment amount while he tries to persuade the court to overturn the jury’s verdict.
The former president’s legal team argues that the bond requirement should be waived given the “strong likelihood” that the outcome of post-trial motions will significantly reduce, if not eliminate, the judgment amount. However, this argument is unlikely to sway Judge Lewis Kaplan, who has shown no willingness to accommodate Trump or his legal team in the past four years.
Trump’s lawyers also argue that the 3.6:1 punitive-to-compensatory ratio is “excessive” and will likely be overturned by the trial judge or on appeal. They conveniently ignore the hundreds of social media attacks launched by their client against Carroll, repeatedly making defamatory statements online even during the trial.
In a stark twist, Trump asserts he is too wealthy for the bond requirement, claiming Carroll can’t argue against his financial resources being significant enough to ensure judgment payment. Yet, despite his declared wealth, his legal team insists that posting a bond would cause him irreparable financial harm.
Judge Kaplan did not welcome Trump’s arguments. In a court document released recently, Kaplan issued an order declining to grant any stay without first giving Carroll a chance to respond. Carroll has until 5:00 p.m. on February 29, 2024, to respond to Trump’s motion, while any reply is due by 5:00 p.m. on March 2, 2024.
Given these developments, it remains uncertain whether Trump will succeed in waiving the bond requirement.
For more detailed insight, you may follow the case Carroll v. Trump on Court Listener.