Trump Club Settlement Excludes Lawyer Alina Habba, Leaving Her Exposed to Potential Lawsuits

Alina Habba, the lawyer who represented former President Donald Trump, has recently found herself in a precarious position — thrown under the bus, so to speak, by Trump’s Bedminster Club. The club settled an out-of-court sexual harassment claim with its former server, Alice Bianco, which included a non-disclosure agreement and a far from generous settlement sum. Whether by chance or calculated advice, Bianco discharged her attorney on the recommendation of Alina Habba, a frequent visitor of the club. However, after Habba later emerged as Trump’s legal representative, Bianco started to question whether the settlement deal was, in fact, fair.

Subsequently, Bianco sought the counsel of an experienced employment lawyer, Nancy Erika Smith, and sued the club to dissolve the agreement. It was during this process that incriminating text exchanges between Bianco and Habba surfaced, accessible here.

The Club and Bianco reached a resolution this month, with the club conceding Bianco’s rights to retain the settlement money, void the release, and instigate a legitimate lawsuit for the initial sexual harassment claim, all while covering her legal expenses. In return, Bianco exonerated the club from the limited claim of fraudulent inducement concerning the questionable settlement.

Notably, Alina Habba was significantly excluded from this settlement agreement. This notable omission allows Bianco the right to potentially sue Habba directly for similar issues, as is evident here. The development positions Habba, the public-facing attorney for Trump, in a precarious situation. Her exclusion from the club settlement undeniably allows for her liability to fraud charges.

The optics of this situation, however, might be of little significance, given Habba is already facing potential fines amounting to nearly a million for sanctions in a separate case, detailed here. What emerges from this situation is an undeniably complex narrative of loyalty and legal obligations, where the notion of steadfast loyalty appears disappointingly one-sided.

For an in-depth look at the development, visit Above The Law.