Bloomberg News reports the truth about Truth Social
Per Bloomberg:
“Donald Trump dodged a contempt of court ruling in litigation over his Truth Social platform Tuesday, but a Delaware judge said she’ll hold his “deeply disappointing” legal tactics against him if he can’t color within the lines going forward.
The judge repeatedly criticized the apparent gamesmanship by Trump and his attorneys, who filed a competing lawsuit in Florida seeking to zero out co-founders Andy Litinsky and Wess Moss. The two former contestants on Trump’s reality TV show The Apprentice are suing to prevent dilution of their 8.6% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., which operates the social media network.
The competing lawsuit undermined the integrity of the judicial process, Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn said during a 40-minute court hearing, but she denied a bid for legal sanctions.
“I share your, perhaps, fear or premonition that things are going to get worse before they get better,” the judge said to a lawyer for the Truth Social co-founders, Christopher Clark of Clark Smith Villazor LLP. Clark had argued that the countersuit “calls into question the validity of this court’s orders” more broadly. He also pointed to Trump’s long history of questionable legal maneuvers.
Despite those misgivings, “my priority needs to be making sure that this court’s contempt power is wielded when it ought to be wielded,” Zurn said. “And if it’s not, then we all just have to—unfortunately—take our lumps and see what other levers can be pulled.”
‘Less Than Forthright’. Litinsky and Moss said in their contempt motion that Trump and other TMTG affiliates violated a Delaware Chancery Court order by bringing the Florida case. That suit seeks to cancel shares that were once worth $600 million, although the volatile meme stock is currently trading near an all-time low. Trump has owned a majority of TMTG since its merger with a special purpose acquisition company.
Zurn rejected that argument, saying the Delaware court order—issued by a different judge in March—pertained narrowly to stock lockup restrictions and potential share dilution. The order didn’t bar Trump and his affiliates from suing to cancel those shares altogether over unrelated misconduct allegations, the judge said.
But the move does seem “inconsistent with both the spirit of the order and the collaborative approach the parties and court had enjoyed in the early days of this case,” as well as “the finest tradition of our bar,” according to Zurn.
“What TMTG has done is deeply disappointing” and “less than forthright,” she said. “I will carry that disappointment and distrust with me as we proceed in this matter.”
An attorney for Trump, Ted Kittila of Halloran Farkas Kittila LLP, defended his approach but acknowledged he was stung by the criticism. “That hurts a great deal,” Kittila said. “I will always be disappointed when I disappoint this court.”
Clark, meanwhile, said Trump had gone beyond “throwing pizza at the wall” and forcing the court to clean up the mess. “There are pizzas flying everywhere,” he said, and there’s no reason to think the former president will change course until he’s hit with sanctions.
“We’ll continue to play whack-a-mole and try to defend this process,” but “I think we all know what’s going to happen,” Clark said. “Regrettably, I’m afraid we’ll be back.” “
The case is United Atl. Ventures LLC v. Trump Media & Tech. Grp. Corp., Del. Ch., No. 2024-0184, contempt hearing 8/27/24.
“Donald Trump dodged a contempt of court ruling in litigation over his Truth Social platform Tuesday, but a Delaware judge said she’ll hold his “deeply disappointing” legal tactics against him if he can’t color within the lines going forward.
The judge repeatedly criticized the apparent gamesmanship by Trump and his attorneys, who filed a competing lawsuit in Florida seeking to zero out co-founders Andy Litinsky and Wess Moss. The two former contestants on Trump’s reality TV show The Apprentice are suing to prevent dilution of their 8.6% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., which operates the social media network.
The competing lawsuit undermined the integrity of the judicial process, Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn said during a 40-minute court hearing, but she denied a bid for legal sanctions.
“I share your, perhaps, fear or premonition that things are going to get worse before they get better,” the judge said to a lawyer for the Truth Social co-founders, Christopher Clark of Clark Smith Villazor LLP. Clark had argued that the countersuit “calls into question the validity of this court’s orders” more broadly. He also pointed to Trump’s long history of questionable legal maneuvers.
Despite those misgivings, “my priority needs to be making sure that this court’s contempt power is wielded when it ought to be wielded,” Zurn said. “And if it’s not, then we all just have to—unfortunately—take our lumps and see what other levers can be pulled.”
‘Less Than Forthright’. Litinsky and Moss said in their contempt motion that Trump and other TMTG affiliates violated a Delaware Chancery Court order by bringing the Florida case. That suit seeks to cancel shares that were once worth $600 million, although the volatile meme stock is currently trading near an all-time low. Trump has owned a majority of TMTG since its merger with a special purpose acquisition company.
Zurn rejected that argument, saying the Delaware court order—issued by a different judge in March—pertained narrowly to stock lockup restrictions and potential share dilution. The order didn’t bar Trump and his affiliates from suing to cancel those shares altogether over unrelated misconduct allegations, the judge said.
But the move does seem “inconsistent with both the spirit of the order and the collaborative approach the parties and court had enjoyed in the early days of this case,” as well as “the finest tradition of our bar,” according to Zurn.
“What TMTG has done is deeply disappointing” and “less than forthright,” she said. “I will carry that disappointment and distrust with me as we proceed in this matter.”
An attorney for Trump, Ted Kittila of Halloran Farkas Kittila LLP, defended his approach but acknowledged he was stung by the criticism. “That hurts a great deal,” Kittila said. “I will always be disappointed when I disappoint this court.”
Clark, meanwhile, said Trump had gone beyond “throwing pizza at the wall” and forcing the court to clean up the mess. “There are pizzas flying everywhere,” he said, and there’s no reason to think the former president will change course until he’s hit with sanctions.
“We’ll continue to play whack-a-mole and try to defend this process,” but “I think we all know what’s going to happen,” Clark said. “Regrettably, I’m afraid we’ll be back.” “
The case is United Atl. Ventures LLC v. Trump Media & Tech. Grp. Corp., Del. Ch., No. 2024-0184, contempt hearing 8/27/24.
61-69, M
