Washington Post wants Trump lawsuit docs unsealed
The Washington Post is jumping in to ongoing litigation against Donald Trump and Trump University, asking a judge to publicly release evidence in the case that was filed under seal nearly two years ago.
Among the evidence the newspaper is seeking is the deposition of Michael Sexton — the entrepreneur who co-founded Trump University — the Trump University business plan, advertisements and other materials prepared for the seminars and declarations and evaluations from former students.
In total, the newspaper is asking the judge in the case to unseal more than 900 pages of exhibits that were filed under seal in June and July 2014. The sealed documents include both evidence cited by the plaintiffs in making their case for a class action suit against Trump and documents cited by Trump's lawyers in response.
The Post argued in a filing Friday that "as this litigation concerns the business activities of a leading presidential candidate, and the lawsuit itself has become a prominent issue in the campaign," there is no private interest that could override "the exceptionally strong public interest in ensuring that the proceedings are open to public scrutiny."
The case — Art Cohen vs. Donald Trump — is one of two lawsuits against Trump University moving simultaneously through a federal court in California alleging that the university did not provide the promised expert guidance and training in real estate that promotional materials promised. The Cohen case alleges fraudulent scheme that violates the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
A settlement conference ordered by the judge was held March 29, but there is no indication the parties have reached a deal.
The second case, Tarla Makaeff et. al v. Trump University, alleges fraud against students in California, Florida and New York. The Makaeff case could go to trial this year, though Trump's lawyers have argued that it would be impossible to seat a fair jury during a presidential campaign.
Trump's lawyers have vigorously denied the claims in both cases, arguing that the plaintiffs got what they paid for. In the Cohen case, Trump's lawyers argue that students — including the lead plaintiff — have previously given the program good evaluations.