Manhattan DA's Office Asks for Dismissal of SDNY Challenge to Trump Tax Subpoena
The Manhattan DA said the case is ready to be decided on the merits, one day after U.S. Justice Department lawyers filed papers urging deliberate consideration of President Donald Trump's claims in a suit over his subpoenaed tax returns.
October 03, 2019 at 01:47 PM
3 minute read
Lawyers with the office of New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. on Thursday urged a federal judge to turn back a challenge to a grand jury subpoena seeking President Donald Trump's tax returns from his personal accounting firm.
Vance's office fired back at the position taken by the U.S. Department of Justice, arguing the case is ready to be decided on the merits, one day after U.S. Justice Department lawyers filed papers urging deliberate consideration of Trump's claims in a suit over his subpoenaed tax returns.
In a letter to U.S. Senior District Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York, the district attorney's general counsel Carey Dunne criticized the Justice Department for getting involved in the case and said its filing "ignores the reality underlying (Trump's) lawsuit."
The Manhattan DA's office argued that Marrero should dismiss the suit because Trump should have filed his complaint in state court and not in the Southern District of New York. Support for Trump's choice of forum was a main point in the Justice Department's filing Thursday.
Dunne accused the Justice Department of joining Trump's lawyers in an attempt to "obtain as much delay as possible, through litigation, stays and appeals."
He wrote that the Justice Department letter "avoids taking any position on the ultimate merits" of Trump's case. In an argument to avoid further delays, Dunne argued that the merits "have been, at this point, fully briefed and argued."
A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment Thursday.
Trump sued Vance Sept. 19 in response to an August grand jury subpoena for eight years of his tax returns, which was delivered to Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA.
While the exact issues under investigation by the grand jury are not publicly known, lawyers with the Manhattan DA's office have said they're particularly concerned about delay because statute of limitation expiration dates are coming up for some matters under investigation.
A deadline in the subpoena lawsuit is coming up Monday. Vance's office agreed not to enforce the subpoena until 1 p.m. Oct. 7 or 1 p.m. the day that falls two business days after Marrero rules on pending motions, whichever is sooner.
Mazars agreed to gather and prepare documents in the meantime, according to a letter submitted to Marrero, and the firm plans to make its first delivery of documents in person at 4 p.m. the day the agreement ends, unless Marrero orders otherwise.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSEC Under Trump 2.0 Likely to Take More 'Measured' Enforcement Approach, Observers Say
Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
Decision of the Day: Attorney in Social Security Case Awarded Fees, But Must Pay Client Refund Under Equal Access to Justice Act
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250