In recent court filings, Rudy Giuliani argued against being held in contempt during the judgment phase of his defamation case involving two former Georgia election workers. Giuliani, who owes Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye Moss $148 million for defamation, contends that the receivership to enforce the judgment has not legally commenced. He claims this is due to the plaintiffs’ failure to file the required oaths under New York state law.
Giuliani’s motion highlights that a temporary receiver must take an oath before assuming their duties, as outlined in state legal procedures. He asserts that neither Freeman nor Moss filed such an oath, nor did they seek a waiver for the requirement. As a result, Giuliani argues that they are not authorized to act as receivers and cannot take possession of his property.
The motion cites legal precedent to bolster the claim, referencing cases where receivers were deemed unqualified to act without fulfilling the oath requirement. Giuliani insists that the court should not have ordered him to turn over property to the plaintiffs, as their receivership authority has not been properly established.
Additionally, Giuliani disputes allegations that he failed to comply with court orders related to discovery and property turnover. He argues that since replacing his legal team in November, he has made significant efforts to comply with the court’s directives. The defendant further claims that the expedited nature of the case has not caused any delays or additional costs for the plaintiffs, which he believes negates the need for sanctions.
The court previously issued two orders directing Giuliani to respond to discovery requests, with deadlines in late October and November. Freeman and Moss allege that he ignored these deadlines, prompting them to seek judicial intervention. Giuliani counters that his actions have not caused any material harm to the plaintiffs, as the trial is still scheduled to proceed as planned in January.
The motion also challenges the court’s handling of the receivership, suggesting that no property should be transferred until the plaintiffs comply with the legal requirements for acting as receivers. Giuliani maintains that the court should not entertain any contempt or sanction requests until these procedural issues are resolved.
