Donald Trump’s legal team has submitted a motion to New York’s Supreme Court to recuse Judge Arthur Engoron from his civil fraud case, alleging that wrongful communications occurred before a significant ruling.

Trump's attorneys have requested that Engoron step aside amid a judicial investigation into his allegedly improper conduct with a high-profile lawyer, as the Post Millennial reports.

Motion Filed in New York Supreme Court

On Thursday, Trump's legal team officially filed its motion in the New York Supreme Court. Central to the team's argument is the claim that Judge Arthur Engoron should be disqualified from presiding over Trump's civil fraud case.

In February, Judge Engoron ruled that Trump must pay more than $454 million in damages in a case initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James. As part of the court's decision, Trump was also barred from running any businesses in the state for three years.

Trump's lawyers now contend that the judge is compromised and that an ongoing state judicial investigation into his conduct supports their motion for recusal.

Investigation into Engoron's Conduct

The judicial investigation focuses on whether Judge Engoron had inappropriate discussions with real estate lawyer Adam Leitman Bailey before delivering the February ruling. Reports suggest that Bailey, whose law license had previously been suspended, communicated with Engoron approximately three weeks before the decision.

In a statement, Bailey recounted his interaction, saying, "I actually had the ability to speak to him three weeks ago.” He further added, "I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, 'I need to go.' And I walked over and we started talking… I wanted him to know what I think and why…I really want him to get it right."

Judge Engoron, through a court spokesman, denied any undue influence, asserting that his decision "was deeply considered and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual."

Claims of Judicial Impartiality and Communication Irregularities

Trump’s legal team, citing reporting by NBC New York, has raised doubts about the judge's impartiality. The attorneys claim Engoron failed to inform them about Bailey’s unsolicited input.

The motion argues that, “Where, as here, this Court's impartiality might reasonably be questioned under the circumstances, it must recuse. Indeed, there is no other means of dispelling the shadow that now looms over this Court's impartiality." Trump’s attorneys describe the last three months as complicated by what they term 'obfuscation.'

Attorney Alina Habba, representing Trump, stated, "The New York Code of Judicial Conduct exists to ensure that litigants are afforded a fair and impartial trial." She continues, "Justice Engoron's communications with Attorney Adam Leitman Bailey regarding the merits of this case, however, directly violate that code and demonstrate that Judge Engoron cannot serve as a fair arbiter. It is clear that Judge Engoron should recuse himself immediately."

Request for Evidentiary Hearing

If Judge Engoron declines to recuse himself, Trump’s legal team has requested an evidentiary hearing before a different judge. This hearing would involve calling witnesses, including Bailey, to testify about the alleged communications.

Bailey's law license has been suspended in the past, adding another layer of controversy to his involvement. While Bailey admitted to speaking with Engoron, he insisted that his comments were unsolicited and not intended to influence the court's decision.

Conversely, Al Baker, spokesman for the New York State's Office of Court Administration, reinforced Judge Engoron’s position, stating, "No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr. Bailey or any other person. The decision Justice Engoron issued February 16 was his alone, was deeply considered, and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual."

Next Steps in the Case

The implications of this motion and the judicial investigation are yet to be determined. Trump’s legal team remains focused on ensuring that Engoron is either recused or that the requested evidentiary hearing is granted.

The contested communication between Judge Engoron and Adam Leitman Bailey is a critical focal point for Trump's defense, who argue that such interactions compromise the fairness of the trial.

If the court grants Trump’s request for an evidentiary hearing, the situation will escalate further, potentially involving testimony that could shed more light on the nature of the conversations and possibly impacting the case’s outcome.

As this legal battle continues to unfold, all eyes are on how the court will address these serious allegations and what impact this will have on Trump's ability to navigate the legal system.