By James D. Zirin
James D. Zirin, a former federal prosecutor, is the author of "Plaintiff in Chief: A Portrait of Donald Trump in 3,500 lawsuits."
June 28, 2021 at 5:00 a.m. CDT
Former president Donald Trump had a contract with the city of New York to operate a golf course in the Bronx. He claims that he spent $30 million on a new clubhouse, restaurant and large pro shop. But just as he was about to open the renovated facility, he found himself on the receiving end of a peremptory “You’re fired!” The city’s mayor, Bill de Blasio (D), canceled the contract, saying that because of Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6, when a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, the course was no longer a “first-class, tournament-quality course.” In short, the city determined that Trump had become too toxic to run a golf club.
Trump sued in New York State Supreme Court to reinstate the contract — or to get his $30 million back. He claims he is a billionaire, so $30 million can’t mean that much to him, but he is suing anyway. Which is not in itself surprising. Suing is what Trump does. Over the years of his professional history, as I wrote in my book, “Plaintiff in Chief,” Trump became more than litigious — he acquired a litigation mentality. He sued at the drop of a hat. He sued for sport. He sued to achieve a sense of control, and he sued to make a point. He sued as a way to destroy or silence those who crossed him. Often, he would sue and, shortly afterward, drop the suit. Or, years after, settle it. Trump viewed the law not as a system of rules to be obeyed and ethical ideals to be respected, but as a potent weapon to be used against his adversaries or a hurdle to be sidestepped when it got in his way.
But that was then. A four-year presidency interrupted Trump’s business career, and a lot happened in those four years. Trump faces legal jeopardy on several fronts. It’s very possible that the legal system he has wielded as a weapon and plaything for his entire adult life has been wrested from him. Now lawsuits can mean one thing above all: criminal exposure.
Civil suits may pry out the information we need to hold Trump accountable
Trump has a super-litigious personality with an unfortunate tendency toward “ready, fire, aim.” He has never hesitated to sue to further his personal objectives. The interesting question is whether this lawsuit was a bad move when he is under criminal investigation in New York, arising from his murky financial affairs, and in Washington and Georgia, from his allegedly seditious conduct on and leading up to Jan. 6. People under criminal investigation are wise to lie low.
Trump’s statement about the golf course contretemps was irrelevant: “The City has no right to terminate our contract. Mayor de Blasio’s actions are purely politically motivated, have no legal merit, and are yet another example of the mayor’s efforts to advance his own partisan agenda and interfere with free enterprise.” But the city had the right to cancel the golf course contract for any reason; at issue in the lawsuit, then, is whether it owes Trump anything for the renovations and improvements.
But by suing, Trump has exposed himself to broad discovery, by way of the depositions and document requests customary in civil litigation. The New York civil discovery statutes provide that “there shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof,” and the courts have interpreted these provisions liberally to give each side a full preview of the other’s case.
Attorneys for the city undoubtedly will want to probe in discovery the state of Trump’s finances. He is said to be deeply in debt. His precarious financial situation may disqualify him from operating a tournament-worthy golf course. They will also want to go into what Trump meant on Jan. 6 when he perpetuated the “big lie,” asserting that there had been mass election fraud, encouraging an unruly mob of his supporters to go to the Capitol and “fight like hell” to stop the certification of an election he had “won in a landslide” and to “take back our country.” The city will certainly call witnesses from the PGA and the British Open who would be expected to testify that they canceled plans for tournaments at Trump golf courses because Trump’s name has become mud.
I bought the website Trump.org. Then Donald Trump came after me.
The city lawyers will seek financial documents to show any connection between the Bronx golf course and Trump’s other business interests. They will want to probe the cost and quality of the improvements Trump claims he made, and may even go into the source of the money. If Trump borrowed the money, they will subpoena the banks and probe his banking relationships, including the financial statements he gave the banks to obtain the loans. They could even get into his controversial tax returns. Trump may well rue the day he brought the lawsuit.
James D. Zirin, a former federal prosecutor, is the author of "Plaintiff in Chief: A Portrait of Donald Trump in 3,500 lawsuits."
June 28, 2021 at 5:00 a.m. CDT
Former president Donald Trump had a contract with the city of New York to operate a golf course in the Bronx. He claims that he spent $30 million on a new clubhouse, restaurant and large pro shop. But just as he was about to open the renovated facility, he found himself on the receiving end of a peremptory “You’re fired!” The city’s mayor, Bill de Blasio (D), canceled the contract, saying that because of Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6, when a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, the course was no longer a “first-class, tournament-quality course.” In short, the city determined that Trump had become too toxic to run a golf club.
Trump sued in New York State Supreme Court to reinstate the contract — or to get his $30 million back. He claims he is a billionaire, so $30 million can’t mean that much to him, but he is suing anyway. Which is not in itself surprising. Suing is what Trump does. Over the years of his professional history, as I wrote in my book, “Plaintiff in Chief,” Trump became more than litigious — he acquired a litigation mentality. He sued at the drop of a hat. He sued for sport. He sued to achieve a sense of control, and he sued to make a point. He sued as a way to destroy or silence those who crossed him. Often, he would sue and, shortly afterward, drop the suit. Or, years after, settle it. Trump viewed the law not as a system of rules to be obeyed and ethical ideals to be respected, but as a potent weapon to be used against his adversaries or a hurdle to be sidestepped when it got in his way.
But that was then. A four-year presidency interrupted Trump’s business career, and a lot happened in those four years. Trump faces legal jeopardy on several fronts. It’s very possible that the legal system he has wielded as a weapon and plaything for his entire adult life has been wrested from him. Now lawsuits can mean one thing above all: criminal exposure.
Civil suits may pry out the information we need to hold Trump accountable
Trump has a super-litigious personality with an unfortunate tendency toward “ready, fire, aim.” He has never hesitated to sue to further his personal objectives. The interesting question is whether this lawsuit was a bad move when he is under criminal investigation in New York, arising from his murky financial affairs, and in Washington and Georgia, from his allegedly seditious conduct on and leading up to Jan. 6. People under criminal investigation are wise to lie low.
Trump’s statement about the golf course contretemps was irrelevant: “The City has no right to terminate our contract. Mayor de Blasio’s actions are purely politically motivated, have no legal merit, and are yet another example of the mayor’s efforts to advance his own partisan agenda and interfere with free enterprise.” But the city had the right to cancel the golf course contract for any reason; at issue in the lawsuit, then, is whether it owes Trump anything for the renovations and improvements.
But by suing, Trump has exposed himself to broad discovery, by way of the depositions and document requests customary in civil litigation. The New York civil discovery statutes provide that “there shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof,” and the courts have interpreted these provisions liberally to give each side a full preview of the other’s case.
Attorneys for the city undoubtedly will want to probe in discovery the state of Trump’s finances. He is said to be deeply in debt. His precarious financial situation may disqualify him from operating a tournament-worthy golf course. They will also want to go into what Trump meant on Jan. 6 when he perpetuated the “big lie,” asserting that there had been mass election fraud, encouraging an unruly mob of his supporters to go to the Capitol and “fight like hell” to stop the certification of an election he had “won in a landslide” and to “take back our country.” The city will certainly call witnesses from the PGA and the British Open who would be expected to testify that they canceled plans for tournaments at Trump golf courses because Trump’s name has become mud.
I bought the website Trump.org. Then Donald Trump came after me.
The city lawyers will seek financial documents to show any connection between the Bronx golf course and Trump’s other business interests. They will want to probe the cost and quality of the improvements Trump claims he made, and may even go into the source of the money. If Trump borrowed the money, they will subpoena the banks and probe his banking relationships, including the financial statements he gave the banks to obtain the loans. They could even get into his controversial tax returns. Trump may well rue the day he brought the lawsuit.