Giuliani's lawyers after $148M defamation judgment seek to withdraw from his case
Two attorneys representing Rudy Giuliani in a lawsuit related to a $148 million defamation judgment against him have asked a judge to remove them from the case over disagreements with the former New York City mayor
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Two attorneys representing Rudy Giuliani in a lawsuit related to a $148 million defamation judgment against him have asked a judge to remove them from the case over disagreements with the former New York City mayor.
The request in federal court comes a week after a judge ordered Giuliani to quickly turn over a car, an heirloom watch and other prized assets to two Georgia election workers who were awarded the judgment last year. Lawyers for the election workers, Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, say Giuliani has avoided turning over his assets.
In a filing late Wednesday, attorney Kenneth Caruso sought permission for himself and co-counsel David Labkowski to stop representing Giuliani.
Caruso wrote that lawyers may withdraw from representing clients when there is a “fundamental disagreement,” or when a client insists on presenting a claim that is not warranted under the law and cannot be supported by a good-faith argument, or when the client fails to cooperate.
Several paragraphs of the publicly posted filing are blacked out. The redacted version does not provide details on possible issues.
A representative for Giuliani didn’t immediately respond to an email and a phone call seeking comment.
Giuliani has until Monday to oppose the motion.
The massive defamation judgment stems from Giuliani’s role in pushing Trump’s unfounded claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.
The former mayor and longtime Trump ally has been defiant amid the collection efforts, which have stretched past an Oct. 29 deadline. He told reporters outside of court last week he was the victim of a “political vendetta.”
Giuliani, who has since been disbarred in New York and Washington, had falsely accused Freeman and Moss of ballot fraud, saying they snuck in ballots in suitcases, counted ballots multiple times and tampered with voting machines.