Motion-Secondary: People Of The State Of New York, By Letitia James, Attorney General Of The State Of New York v. Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump, Allen Weisselberg, Jeffrey Mcconney, The Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, The Trump Organization, Inc., Trump Organization Llc, Djt Holdings Llc, Djt Holdings Managing Member, Trump Endeavor 12 Llc, 401 North Wabash Venture Llc, Trump Old Post Office Llc, 40 Wall Street Llc, Seven Springs Llc

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/14/2024 11:08 PM                                                    INDEX NO. 452564/2022
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1720                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/14/2024




          STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT
          COUNTY OF NEW YORK
          --------------------------------------------------------------------
          PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BY
          LETITIA JAMES, Attorney General of the State of New
          York,
                                              Plaintiff,

          -against
                                                                                 AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF
                                                                                 MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT

                                                                                  Index No. 452564/2022
                                                                                  Engoron, J.S.C.

          DONALD J. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP, JR., ERIC
          TRUMP, ALLEN WEISSELBERG, JEFFREY
          MCCONNEY, THE DONALD J. TRUMP
          REVOCABLE TRUST, THE TRUMP
          ORGANIZATION, INC., TRUMP ORGANIZATION
          LLC, DJT HOLDINGS LLC, DJT HOLDINGS
          MANAGING MEMBER, TRUMP ENDEAVOR 12
          LLC, 401 NORTH WABASH VENTURE LLC,
          TRUMP OLD POST OFFICE LLC, 40 WALL STREET
          LLC, and SEVEN SPRINGS LLC,

                                    Defendants,

          --------------------------------------------------------------------
          Robert S. Stone Jr., an “Attorney and Counselor-at-Law” duly admitted by the Appellate
          Division Second Department to practice in the State of New York, hereby affirms the following
          under penalty of perjury:

              1. On January 17, 2024, I filed a motion to intervene—calling the Court’s attention to facts
                  precluding the existence of subject matter jurisdiction over any prosecutions brought by
                  New York Attorney General Letitia James after licensing former Governor Andrew M.
                  Cuomo’s mandating of COVID patients into nursing homes during the lockdown with
                  Executive Order 202.5 in full force and effect. See Notice of Appeal with Appellate
                  Brief attached hereto as Exhibit A.

              2. By Order dated and entered February 27, 2024, the Court ruled that I had “no right to
                  intervene in this action”—five days after issuing its Judgment against Donald J. Trump, et
                  al., dated February 22, 2024, entered February 23, 2024 (Hereinafter: “the Judgement”).




                                                               1 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/14/2024 11:08 PM                                               INDEX NO. 452564/2022
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1720                                                                   RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/14/2024




             3. Ironically, entry of “the Judgment” eliminated the necessity of becoming a party to the
                action before challenging the Court’s jurisdiction.

             4. In Oppenheimer v. Westcott, 47 N.Y.2d 595, 602 (N.Y. 1979), the Court of Appeals held:

                        CPLR 5015 (subd [a]) provides that:

                        "The court which rendered a judgment or order may relieve a party
                        from it upon such terms as may be just, on motion of any interested
                        person with such notice as the court may direct, upon the ground of:
                        ***
                        "[4. lack of jurisdiction to render the judgment or order.]"

                        Clear from its use of the words "any interested person" within a
                        dozen words of the phrase "relieve a party" is that to avail himself
                        of the remedy provided by that section one need not have been a
                        party to the original action (see, e.g., Bardach v Mayfair-Flushing
                        Corp., 49 Misc.2d 380, affd 26 A.D.2d 620). "To seek relief from
                        a judgment or order, all that is necessary is that some legitimate
                        interest of the moving party will be served and that judicial
                        assistance will avoid injustice" (5 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N Y
                        Civ Prac, par 5015.15, p 50-252).

             5. Accordingly, I submit this Affirmation in support of a motion pursuant to CPLR §
                5015(a)(4)—as a non-party “interested person”—to vacate “the Judgement” for lack of
                subject matter jurisdiction.

             6. To be clear, my “legitimate interest” in vacating “the Judgment” against Donald J. Trump,
                et al. for lack of subject matter jurisdiction derives analytically from Judiciary Law § 466
                and Article XIII § 1 of the New York Constitution; since upholding my oath as “Attorney
                and Counselor-at-Law” necessitates seeking “judicial assistance” to “avoid injustice” as
                summarized below.

                                          RESTATEMENT OF FACTS

             7. To paraphrase Forest Gump: “I’m not a smart man, but I know what [subject matter
                jurisdiction] is.”




                                                       2 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/14/2024 11:08 PM                                               INDEX NO. 452564/2022
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1720                                                                   RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/14/2024




             8. Just as we know from Immanuel Kant that existence is the condition precedent for all possible
                predicates within the universe, so too we know from first year Civil Procedure that subject
                matter jurisdiction is the condition precedent for all possible judicial proceedings.

             9. Thus, as New York Attorney General Letitia James clubs Donald Trump like a baby seal
                with “the Judgment” from a show trial ripped from the pages of Darkness at Noon,
                a certain cartoon rabbit informing my unity of apperception was heard to say:
                “Oh brother, there goes me bread and butter. I gotta do something.”

             10. ‘Twas then I concluded with epistemic certainty that upholding my oath as “Attorney and
                Counselor-at-Law” constrains me to show the Court how “the Judgment” is void for lack
                of subject matter jurisdiction because the Attorney General who obtained it licensed the
                former Governor’s Depraved Indifference Murder of more than 15,000 nursing home
                residents.

             11. Accordingly, since objections for lack of subject matter jurisdiction “may be raised at any
                time,” Lacks v. Lacks, 41 N.Y.2d 71, 75 (N.Y. 1976), there’s no time like the present for
                ‘calling the Court’s attention to facts’ surrounding the aforesaid mass democide that render
                “the Judgment” a nullity as a matter of logic, Fry v. Village of Tarrytown, 89 N.Y.2d 714,
                718 (N.Y. 1997), more particularly described within Exhibit A attached hereto.

                WHEREFORE, unless the Court can demonstrate how a state could “lockdown” its entire
                population to keep COVID away from the elderly while simultaneously mandating COVID
                patients into nursing homes without committing Depraved Indifference Murder, “the
                Judgment” must be vacated for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the New York
                Constitution does not empower the Judiciary to entertain prosecutions brought by an
                Attorney General who tyrannically licensed the Governor to commit Mass Depraved
                Indifference Murder of U.S. Citizens as a matter of logic.


          Dated: April 14, 2024
          Stony Brook, New York



                                                                      Robert S. Stone Jr., Esq.
                                                                      4 Blackwell Lane
                                                                      Stony Brook, NY 11790
                                                                      Bob.stone.esq@gmail.com
                                                                      NYSB No. 2912780




                                                       3 of 3