Court proceedings in Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy case hit a boiling point Wednesday when lawyers for the creditors owed $148 million by the former New York City mayor floated the possibility of seeking jail time for his alleged “bankruptcy crimes.”
In New York federal court, Rachel Strickland, an attorney representing the two Georgia 2020 election workers who Giuliani defamed, pushed to have Giuliani’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy case thrown out, offering that Giuliani could receive a “hall pass” if the court did not do so, the Independent reported.
Strickland alleged Giuliani, the former attorney for Donald Trump, has used the proceedings to protect himself from the financial ramifications of the defamation case, and pointed to how he has time and again refused to follow requirements to disclose his income and assets, according to Politico.
ADVERTISEMENT
“He regards this court as a pause button on his woes while he continues to live his life unbothered by creditors,” Strickland added. “If the case is dismissed, creditors will be able to hold America’s mayor accountable for the harms he’s caused.”
The assertion prompted Giuliani to interrupt on the call, characterize Strickland’s statements as “highly defamatory,” and request a break, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane declined to give.
Gary Fischoff, Giuliani's attorney, later clarified “Giuliani would not be committing any bankruptcy crimes.”
Lane indicated he was leaning toward dismissing the case, namely because of his concern Giuliani has used the matter to delay the payouts, per Politico.
“I am concerned that the past is prologue,” the judge said, adding he remains concerned “the difficulties that we’ve encountered in this case in terms of transparency will continue and dog the case.”
According to the Independent, Giuliani was initially seeking to convert the case from a Chapter 11 to a Chapter 7 to liquidate his assets.
But just before the hearing began, Giuliani’s legal team changed course and indicated it also supported dismissing the case. Fischoff said a dismissal would allow for “the best chance” for an appeals ruling in the defamation case.
