Trump U Students Say Trial Shouldn’t Pause For Presidential Transition

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Consumers pursuing a class action lawsuit over the alleged fraudulent Trump University real estate program are urging a California federal judge to proceed with a trial scheduled to begin later this month, opposing claims that forcing the president-elect to stand trial at this time would hamper “imperative transition work.”

In a court filing Monday, the consumers told U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel that any further delays in the class action lawsuit risk rolling the case into Trump’s presidency and possibly even more postponements.

“Plaintiffs have waited more than six and a half years for their day in court, and it would be an injustice to them and undermine the independence and truth-seeking function of the judiciary to ask them to wait until Trump assumes office and the demands of the presidency turn from mere preparation to actual practice,” the consumers stated.

Trump’s counsel is seeking to delay the trial slated for Nov. 28 until after his inauguration, citing the many transition-related tasks the president-elect has before his inauguration.

“In fewer than three months, the president-elect must be prepared to manage 15 executive departments, more than 100 federal agencies, 2 million civilian employees and a budget of almost $4 trillion,” the ex parte application states. “He needs to devote this intensive period to transitioning the vast functions of the federal government to an administration that has yet to be formed.”

However, the plaintiffs challenge this argument to delay the Trump University trial, claiming that if anything, “Trump’s life is only going to get more complicated and unpredictable as time goes by,” noting that any delay would be a “slippery slope.”

The 2010 lawsuit over the now-closed Trump University was filed on behalf of students who say they were lured by false promises to pay up to $35,000 to learn Trump’s real estate investing “secrets” from his “hand-picked” instructors. Trump owned 92 percent of Trump University and had control over all major decisions, the students’ court documents say.

“The legal standard for moving a trial date is the same for defendant Trump, candidate Trump and President-elect Trump: he must establish good cause,” the consumers said. “Because President-elect Trump has failed to suggest, let alone establish, a single admissible fact that he will be unable to present at the currently scheduled trial, he has failed to establish good cause for delay.”

The lawsuit set for trial later this month is actually one of two class action lawsuits over Trump University pending in front of Judge Curiel in California.

In the lawsuits, consumers are leveling a series of fraud claims against Trump and Trump University, but only two are at issue in the case set for trial later this month: that Trump University was falsely promoted as an accredited university and that the program advertised its instructors as handpicked by Trump, when they were not.

Trump University attorneys have rejected the claims, saying they came from only a small group of unhappy students. They have cited a large number of evaluations that were filled out by students showing that they were satisfied with what they had gotten from the program

In October, the defense motioned to limit evidence related to the bankruptcy proceedings of certain former Trump University instructors, arguing the documents are not relevant to the case and would only invoke prejudice against the now-defunct school.

The consumers are represented by Patrick Coughlin, X. Jay Alvarez, Jason A. Forge, Rachel L. Jensen, Daniel J. Pfefferbaum, Brian E. Cochran and Jeffrey J. Stein of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Amber L. Eck and Aaron M. Olsen of Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck LLP.

The Trump University False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Sonny Low v. Trump University LLC, et al., Case No. 3:10-cv-00940, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

UPDATE: On Nov. 18, 2016, President-elect Donald Trump has agreed to pay $25 million to settle two federal class action lawsuits over the now-defunct Trump University real estate seminar program, according to the New York Attorney General’s office.

UPDATE 2: The Trump University Live Events class action settlement is now open! Click here to file a claim.

UPDATE 3: On March 31, 2017, a federal judge signed off on a class action settlement against Trump University, finding that the parties arrived at an agreement that was “fair, reasonable, and adequate.”

UPDATE 4: On Feb. 6, 2018, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to the $25 million Trump University class action settlement, which means that eligible Class Members who filed timely and valid claims are one step closer to receiving payment.