Roberta Kaplan, serving as the legal counsel for E. Jean Carroll in her defamation case against ex-President Donald Trump, issued a stern rebuke towards Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, this Tuesday. The reprimand was in response to a contentious assertion made by Habba, which was highlighted in The Messenger.
Habba had suggested that Kaplan was entangled in a conflict of interest undisclosed to the court, due to her previous employment at the same law firm as Judge Lewis Kaplan, who is presently presiding over the case. This allegation by Habba has been met with skepticism and criticism by a swath of legal commentators.
In her pointed retort, Kaplan elucidated that her tenure at the law firm coincided with Judge Kaplan’s for a brief period of less than two years, a time frame dating back over thirty years. Kaplan emphasized her recollection of the colleagues she worked closely with during that period, noting that Judge Kaplan was not among them.
Further dismantling Habba’s accusation, Kaplan criticized the reliance on an anonymous source from a New York Post article, which referred to Judge Kaplan as a mentor figure to her. Kaplan dismissed the claim as unfounded, questioning the accuracy and existence of the so-called ‘unnamed partner’ cited by both the Post and Habba, and casting doubt on the reliability of their memories regarding events that transpired three decades ago.
In a decisive close to her correspondence, Kaplan explicitly stated her intention to preserve the option to “seek sanctions” against Habba, positioning this as a potential legal recourse in light of the allegations put forth. This development adds another layer of complexity to the already intricate legal battle unfolding between Carroll and Trump, with the discourse extending beyond the primary legal arguments to encompass questions of professional conduct and integrity within the legal community.
