Trump ordered to pay nearly 355 million in NY fraud case.

[Laniakea]

You’re too lazy to do your own homework.

I wasn't the one making the unsubstantiated claim, so it's not my homework to do.

 

[Callisto]

And yet he's the most successful real estate developer in New York. Not bad for a complete failure, eh?

Sorry, no. Trump has never been the most successful. At best, he lands somewhere in the top 30-100 depending on the year and bankruptcy. He's not even among the NY billionaires with the most billions.

 

[We Never Know]

Okay, that may have been what the judge would have decided. I can quote you where the New York state constitution guarantees trial by jury. If they had asked for a jury and the judge denied it that would have been a basis for appeal. Perhaps the judge would have been right, perhaps not. But it does not matter

Neither side asked for a jury. Each side could have and then the judge would have had to have decided. But neither side did. So we will never know if that interpretation of the law was correct for this case.


Do you not understand that Trump's attorneys never asked for a jury? And it is clear in New York state law that if one does not petition for a jury in a civil case that none will be given.

"I can quote you where the New York state constitution guarantees trial by jury."

Provide it. Especially in a state court under 63(12) where its guaranteed

 

[Laniakea]

That was not what you claimed. Yes, he owns some property. Why do you think that any jobs will be eliminated? In fact I can see several new jobs just from the article that you linked.

News Flash: Those businesses have workers. Close the properties, and those workers no longer have their job.

 

[Laniakea]

You need links. Do you not know how to provide them?

It's not his job to do your homework.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Try understanding the 7th instead of just reading it. Trump was in a state court.

"There are two main types of court systems in the United States: federal and state. The Seventh Amendment requires civil jury trials only in federal courts"

Interpretation: The Seventh Amendment | Constitution Center

Interpretations of The Seventh Amendment by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

And New York has a similar Amendment, but it appears to be aimed at the rights of individuals, not corporations or organizations.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"I can quote you where the New York state constitution guarantees trial by jury."

Provide it. Especially in a state court under 63(12) where you say its guaranteed

I just linked it. It appears to be towards people:

"Article 1 §2 Right to trial by jury; waiver thereof.

Trial by jury in all cases in which it has heretofore been guaranteed by constitutional provision shall remain inviolate forever; but a jury trial may be waived by the parties in all civil cases in the manner to be prescribed by law. The legislature may provide, however, by law, that a verdict may be rendered by not less than five-sixths of the jury in any civil case. A jury trial may be waived by the defendant in all criminal cases, except those in which the crime is punishable by death, by a written instrument signed by the defendant in person in open court before and with the approval of a judge or justice of a court having jurisdiction to try the offense. The legislature may enact laws, not inconsistent herewith, governing the form, content, manner and time of presentation of the instrument effectuating such waiver. "

"
Article 1 §6 Rights to indictment by grand jury and waiver

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime. . . "

Even though it goes on to a different topic that that applies to a "person" indicates that so does the previous.
'

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's not his job to do your homework.

No, that is his homework. And as you see, that was not a valid source.

Part of supporting a claim is providing a link to it. That is the homework of the one making the claim.

 

[Subduction Zone]

News Flash: Those businesses have workers. Close the properties, and those workers no longer have their job.

LOL! You are still making unjustified assumptions.

 

[We Never Know]

I just linked it. It appears to be towards people:

"Article 1 §2 Right to trial by jury; waiver thereof.

Trial by jury in all cases in which it has heretofore been guaranteed by constitutional provision shall remain inviolate forever; but a jury trial may be waived by the parties in all civil cases in the manner to be prescribed by law. The legislature may provide, however, by law, that a verdict may be rendered by not less than five-sixths of the jury in any civil case. A jury trial may be waived by the defendant in all criminal cases, except those in which the crime is punishable by death, by a written instrument signed by the defendant in person in open court before and with the approval of a judge or justice of a court having jurisdiction to try the offense. The legislature may enact laws, not inconsistent herewith, governing the form, content, manner and time of presentation of the instrument effectuating such waiver. "

"
Article 1 §6 Rights to indictment by grand jury and waiver

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime. . . "

Even though it goes on to a different topic that that applies to a "person" indicates that so does the previous.
'

Then I refer you back to my first post...

And you're still wrong. Under 63 (12), which is what this case is filed under, you don’t have a right, an absolute right to a jury.

 

[Ebionite]

Try understanding the 7th instead of just reading it. Trump was in a state court.

"There are two main types of court systems in the United States: federal and state. The Seventh Amendment requires civil jury trials only in federal courts"

No, the two types of court system are common law and admiralty. 7A applies to common law courts, which could exist at the state or federal level.

What your source leaves out is Magna Carta:

"No freeman shall be taken or [and] imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or [and] by the law of the land."

The right to trial by jury from Magna Carta is implied by the Ninth Amendment. Like 7A this is relevant for common law courts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then I refer you back to my first post...

The problem is that 63 (12) applies to businesses not people. "You" do have an absolute right to jury trial. A business named after you would not have an absolute right. If you look into it this was not against "Trump" this case was against the Trump Organization. That is probably why it was a civil suit as well. It is hard to lock up an organization.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, the two types of court system are common law and admiralty. 7A applies to common law courts, which could exist at the state or federal level.

What your source leaves out is Magna Carta:

"No freeman shall be taken or [and] imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or [and] by the law of the land."

The right to trial by jury from Magna Carta is implied by the Ninth Amendment. Like 7A this is relevant for common law courts.

Nope. Ask a judge that works in criminal court. He will tell you that his court was statutory. The "god fringe" on a flag in a court does not mean anything. You are ages behind the times and sound just like a sovereign citizen. The case I was listening to just happened to have a sovereign citizen that was being charged. He did not do very well.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, the two types of court system are common law and admiralty. 7A applies to common law courts, which could exist at the state or federal level.

What your source leaves out is Magna Carta:

"No freeman shall be taken or [and] imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or [and] by the law of the land."

The right to trial by jury from Magna Carta is implied by the Ninth Amendment. Like 7A this is relevant for common law courts.

The 7th Amendment doesn't apply to the states
per SCOTUS.

Incorporation of the Bill of Rights - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Excerpted...

Amendment VII[edit]​

Right to jury trial in civil cases

• This right has not been incorporated against the states.[36] See Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90 (1876), Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211 (1916) and Pearson v. Yewdall, 95 U.S. 294 (1877). In Walker, Justice Morrison Waite ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment did not compel states to provide jury trials for civil matters because states "are left to regulate trials in their own courts in their own way. A trial by jury in suits at common law pending in the State courts is not, therefore, a privilege or immunity of national citizenship."[37]

Re-Examination Clause

• This right has not been incorporated against the states.[36] See The Justices v. Murray, 76 U.S. (9 Wall.) 274 (1870), and Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211 (1916). The right prevents federal courts from retrying a civil jury case without following common law procedures, but not state courts. As the Court ruled in Justices, "the seventh amendment could not be invoked in a State court to prohibit it from re-examining, on a writ of error, facts that had been tried by a jury in the court below."[38]

 

[Ebionite]

Nope. Ask a judge that works in criminal court.

No. You can't make a credible case on this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. You can't make a credible case on this.

Listen to the judge.

 

[Ebionite]

Listen to the judge.

No means no. Sovereign citizen is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Laniakea]

LOL! You are still making unjustified assumptions.

Do you assume that a business being put out of business means that the people working for that business still have a business to work for?
It's never worked that way for me. When you work for a business that shuts it's door for good, you're done.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No means no. Sovereign citizen is a contradiction in terms.

Well you are only half wrong this time. I demonstrated that you are wrong. And yes sovereign citizen is a contradiction in terms. They called them selves that. But now some have different names for them. You make a lot of sovereign citizen arguments. What do you call yourself?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you assume that a business being put out of business means that the people working for that business still have a business to work for?
It's never worked that way for me. When you work for a business that shuts it's door for good, you're done.

You keep making unjustified assumption.

Try asking a question without unjustified assumptions in it.