NEW YORK, Dec 1 (Reuters) - A lawyer for Donald Trump on
Tuesday urged a federal appeals court to halt a lawsuit accusing
the U.S. president of exploiting his family name to promote a
marketing scam targeting poor and working-class people.
The lawyer, Thomas McCarthy, told the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals in Manhattan the plaintiffs were "done in by the
allegations of their own complaint," and that their proposed
class action concerning the multi-level marketing company
American Communications Network belonged in arbitration.
Four plaintiffs, including a hospice worker, accused Trump,
his adult children Donald Jr., Eric and Ivanka and an affiliate
of their family company of promoting ACN in exchange for
millions of dollars in secret payments from 2005 to 2015.
The plaintiffs said ACN charged $499 to sell videophones and
other goods, and the Trump family conned them into thinking
Donald Trump believed their investments would pay off.
Trump and his children have called the civil lawsuit, one of
many against the president, politically motivated, saying they
had no control over ACN and that Trump's endorsement was merely
his opinion.
Some defendants prefer arbitration to litigation because
evidence can be harder to come by, costs can be lower, and
proceedings are often confidential.
U.S. District Judge Lorna Schofield refused in April to send
the ACN case to arbitration, saying the plaintiffs had no reason
to believe their arbitration agreements with ACN covered the
Trumps.
In Tuesday's arguments before a three-judge panel, Circuit
Judge Denny Chin appeared to agree with Schofield's conclusion
that it was unfair for the Trumps to demand arbitration only
after she had dismissed a racketeering claim.
"You waited eight months before asking to compel
arbitration," Chin told McCarthy. "You requested and obtained
substantive relief ... In those circumstances, why isn't the
right to arbitration, to the extent it exists, waived?"
McCarthy responded that the claims against the Trumps and
ACN were intertwined, that only "minimal" time had passed, and
that the lawsuit was still in its early stages.
Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, countered that
arbitration is "fundamentally a matter of consent," and that her
clients never expected to battle the Trumps in arbitration.
"This is a fraud case," she said. "This is about what Donald
Trump said."
The case is Doe et al v Trump Corp et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals, Nos. 20-1228, 20-1278.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Grant
McCool)