President-elect Donald Trump transitions to office in midst of lawsuits

SAN DIEGO — As President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to make his transition to the White House early next year, he does so while still entangled in a variety of civil litigation.

Three of the pending lawsuits involve the now-defunct Trump University, including a class action in San Diego alleging fraud that could result in Trump becoming the first president-elect, or perhaps president, to testify in person during a trial.

Among various other cases, Trump is also part of two suits he launched last year against celebrity chefs alleged to have illegally withdrawn from agreements to build restaurants in the new Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

Becoming commander-in-chief won't help Trump escape the suits in which he is a defendant. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 1997 case involving President Bill Clinton that a sitting president does not have immunity from civil cases over actions alleged to have occurred prior to taking office. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997).

"Judges will be respectful of the president's schedule, but the suits will go forward," said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Irvine School of Law. "This will be one of the many things that makes this an unusual presidency."

One suit poised to garner Trump's attention in the coming weeks is the class action filed against him and Trump University scheduled to start Nov. 28 in the San Diego courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel.

The plaintiffs, some of whom say they spent $35,000 on seminars, accuse Trump University of having been more of an infomercial than a program that provided students with guidance on how to make money through real estate investing. Low v. Trump University LLC, 10-CV0940 (S.D. Cal. filed April 30, 2010).

Trump has adamantly denied wrongdoing and said most students were very pleased with their experiences.

Daniel M. Petrocelli of O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Trump's lead attorney in the case, told Curiel on Thursday that he will seek a continuance of the trial until sometime after Trump is sworn in as president in January.

"The good news is he was elected," Petrocelli said. "The bad news is he has even more work now."

Petrocelli noted that if Trump had to testify in person as president, it would be a first.

"That is what we are trying to prevent," Curiel responded, referencing the current trial date.

Curiel also said he was open to considering Petrocelli's suggestion that it may be most practical for Trump to testify via video.

In a tentative written ruling issued earlier Thursday, Curiel indicated that he planned to deny without prejudice the defendants' request to bar Trump's statements during the recent campaign, as well as other out-of-court comments, from being admitted at trial.

Meanwhile, Petrocelli said that delaying the trial would give Trump more time to try to resolve the plaintiffs' claims.

Curiel urged the two parties to discuss settlement and said his San Diego colleague, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey T. Miller, was willing to assist with settlement talks.

As for the Clinton case, the president was required to testify in a deposition as part of the sexual harassment suit Paula Jones brought against him, but the case was settled in 1998 before trial.

If Trump has to testify in person during the Trump University case, "it will be quite a spectacle," said Robert DeKoven, a professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego.

DeKoven said he believes Curiel was correct to allow the case to proceed to trial.

"It is difficult for consumers to know what a real university is and what is not because we have many online universities," DeKoven said.

A second of the three Trump University-related cases is also before Curiel. Cohen v. Trump, 13-CV02519, (S.D. Cal. filed Oct. 18, 2013). The plaintiffs in that case allege Trump was part of a racketeering scheme through Trump University.

Trump has denied the claims. Curiel denied his motion for summary judgment earlier this year so the case is moving toward trial as well.

The New York Attorney General's Office also has a pending fraud suit that it filed in 2013 against Trump and Trump University.

When asked about the Trump University matters on the campaign trail, Trump said he does not like to settle cases.

But some legal experts have suggested that Trump should alter that approach now that he is set to become president.

"President-elect Trump recently indicated he wanted to bring the country together, so it seems to me he should move heaven and earth to try to settle the cases to spare the country the spectacle and trauma of watching the president of the United States go through a fraud trial," said Christopher Lewis Peterson, a professor at the University of Utah's law school.

Carl Luna, a political science professor at San Diego Mesa College, expressed skepticism that Trump would move quickly to try to settle the pending cases.

Luna said that while the typical president-elect would want to focus with "laser-like intensity" on the transition to office, Trump has shown he believes there is no such thing as bad publicity.

He also said that Trump maintaining the legal battles and having to testify in the Trump University case would likely draw a mixed reaction from the public.

"Those who voted against him will seize on it as an example of how he was a bad choice," Luna said. "Those who voted for him will see this as another example of him always defending himself and being a strong leader."

lyle_moran@dailyjournal.com