This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/us/politics/donald-trump-golf.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Judge Orders Trump-Owned Golf Resort to Pay Millions Judge Orders Trump-Owned Golf Resort to Pay Millions
(about 3 hours later)
In a highly unusual turn of events for a sitting president, a federal judge in Florida on Wednesday ordered a golf resort owned by President Trump to pay $5.7 million for refusing to refund deposits to members who wanted to resign from the club.In a highly unusual turn of events for a sitting president, a federal judge in Florida on Wednesday ordered a golf resort owned by President Trump to pay $5.7 million for refusing to refund deposits to members who wanted to resign from the club.
In his ruling, the judge said that Mr. Trump, by sending a letter in late 2012 denying access to members who wanted to resign from the Trump National Golf Club in Jupiter — a process that could take years — had set off a contract clause that should have resulted in an immediate refund of their membership fees. Instead, the money was withheld.In his ruling, the judge said that Mr. Trump, by sending a letter in late 2012 denying access to members who wanted to resign from the Trump National Golf Club in Jupiter — a process that could take years — had set off a contract clause that should have resulted in an immediate refund of their membership fees. Instead, the money was withheld.
The decision is the first court judgment against a company owned by Mr. Trump since he became president last month, and underscores that while Mr. Trump has stepped away from the operations of his company, he is certain to remain dogged by legal controversies connected to his business.The decision is the first court judgment against a company owned by Mr. Trump since he became president last month, and underscores that while Mr. Trump has stepped away from the operations of his company, he is certain to remain dogged by legal controversies connected to his business.
At his new hotel in Washington, Mr. Trump is suing two celebrity chefs for breach of contract. The two men backed out of the Trump International Hotel development in 2015 after Mr. Trump made inflammatory comments about Mexican immigrants. Separately, the federal government owns the building that houses the hotel, and some legal experts have said that Mr. Trump may be in violation of his lease, which appears to prohibit federal elected officials from the building.At his new hotel in Washington, Mr. Trump is suing two celebrity chefs for breach of contract. The two men backed out of the Trump International Hotel development in 2015 after Mr. Trump made inflammatory comments about Mexican immigrants. Separately, the federal government owns the building that houses the hotel, and some legal experts have said that Mr. Trump may be in violation of his lease, which appears to prohibit federal elected officials from the building.
And last month, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in Manhattan contending that Mr. Trump had violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by allowing his hotels and other businesses to accept payments from foreign governments.And last month, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in Manhattan contending that Mr. Trump had violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by allowing his hotels and other businesses to accept payments from foreign governments.
Mr. Trump has not sold any of his assets, which include golf courses, commercial real estate and marketing agreements. Rather he has handed the operations of his company over to his eldest sons, Donald Jr. and Eric., a move he hopes will reduce the appearance of conflict of interest. Mr. Trump has not sold any of his assets, which include golf courses, commercial real estate and marketing agreements. Rather he has handed the operations of his company over to his eldest sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, a move he hopes will reduce the appearance of conflict of interest.
Wednesday’s ruling — by Judge Kenneth Marra of Federal District Court in West Palm Beach, an appointee of President George W. Bush’s — calls for the club to pay $4.85 million in withheld fees to 65 club members involved in the lawsuit, plus an additional $925,000 in interest and other costs. As a result, those members will receive refunds of $35,000 to $200,000, depending on their level of membership in the club.Wednesday’s ruling — by Judge Kenneth Marra of Federal District Court in West Palm Beach, an appointee of President George W. Bush’s — calls for the club to pay $4.85 million in withheld fees to 65 club members involved in the lawsuit, plus an additional $925,000 in interest and other costs. As a result, those members will receive refunds of $35,000 to $200,000, depending on their level of membership in the club.
Amanda Miller, a spokeswoman for the Trump Organization, said the company planned to appeal.Amanda Miller, a spokeswoman for the Trump Organization, said the company planned to appeal.
“At the time Trump purchased the club, it was suffering financially, making it unlikely that these members would ever get back their deposits,” Ms. Miller said in a statement. “At trial, we presented overwhelming evidence that the plaintiffs’ memberships were never recalled and that the plaintiffs had waived this argument during the course of the litigation.”“At the time Trump purchased the club, it was suffering financially, making it unlikely that these members would ever get back their deposits,” Ms. Miller said in a statement. “At trial, we presented overwhelming evidence that the plaintiffs’ memberships were never recalled and that the plaintiffs had waived this argument during the course of the litigation.”
The dispute at the Jupiter club centered on contracts signed by club members with the facility’s previous owner, Ritz-Carlton. To join, members paid initiation fees as high as $210,000 depending on the type of membership that they wanted. But under Ritz-Carlton’s rules those deposits were refundable when a member resigned. The dispute at the Jupiter club centered on contracts signed by club members with the facility’s previous owner, Ritz-Carlton. To join, members paid initiation fees as high as $210,000, depending on the type of membership that they wanted. But under Ritz-Carlton’s rules those deposits were refundable when a member resigned.
That process, however, could take years and while members on the resignation list waited for their turn to come up they could still use the club so long as they paid annual fees and other costs like food and beverage minimums.That process, however, could take years and while members on the resignation list waited for their turn to come up they could still use the club so long as they paid annual fees and other costs like food and beverage minimums.
That all changed in 2012 when the Trump Organization bought the Jupiter club. Soon afterward, Mr. Trump sent a letter to members saying that those who wanted to resign were no longer welcome there. “I do not want them to utilize the club, nor do I want their dues,” the letter read.That all changed in 2012 when the Trump Organization bought the Jupiter club. Soon afterward, Mr. Trump sent a letter to members saying that those who wanted to resign were no longer welcome there. “I do not want them to utilize the club, nor do I want their dues,” the letter read.
After club members sued, Mr. Trump testified in 2015 during a pretrial deposition that although he had signed the letter, it was his second-eldest son, Eric Trump, who was in charge of policies at the family’s golf courses.After club members sued, Mr. Trump testified in 2015 during a pretrial deposition that although he had signed the letter, it was his second-eldest son, Eric Trump, who was in charge of policies at the family’s golf courses.
“Eric is much more familiar with this club,” his father said. “He runs it.”“Eric is much more familiar with this club,” his father said. “He runs it.”
In his pretrial deposition, Eric Trump testified that nothing had changed and that club members seeking to resign had been allowed to use the club so long as they paid their dues.In his pretrial deposition, Eric Trump testified that nothing had changed and that club members seeking to resign had been allowed to use the club so long as they paid their dues.
That claim, however, was disputed at trial last year.That claim, however, was disputed at trial last year.
One member on the resignation list, Richard Slawson, testified that the club’s membership manager told him soon after the Trumps took it over that the facility was off-limits. But he continued to receive $6,000 bills for annual dues and thousands in minimum charges for food and beverages that were never consumed. One member on the resignation list, Richard Slawson, testified that the club’s membership manager told him soon after the Trumps took it over that the club was off-limits. But he continued to receive $6,000 bills for annual dues and thousands in minimum charges for food and beverages that were never consumed.
“I couldn’t believe that we were charged that when we were not allowed to use the club,” Mr. Slawson, a Florida lawyer, said in a recent telephone interview.“I couldn’t believe that we were charged that when we were not allowed to use the club,” Mr. Slawson, a Florida lawyer, said in a recent telephone interview.
Confronted with such testimony, the younger Mr. Trump during his court testimony backed off his assertions and acknowledged he had been mistaken.Confronted with such testimony, the younger Mr. Trump during his court testimony backed off his assertions and acknowledged he had been mistaken.
“He made himself our strongest witness,” a plaintiff’s lawyer, Bradley Edwards, said about Eric Trump. There was no way to reconcile his prior testimony with his testimony at trial.” “He made himself our strongest witness,” a plaintiff’s lawyer, Bradley Edwards, said about Eric Trump. “There was no way to reconcile his prior testimony with his testimony at trial.”