When A Lawyer Says “Objection!”…

'There's no appeal here': Lawyer shows how Alina Habba dashed Trump's hope of nixing award https://t.co/FG8bnSlsDD

— Raw Story (@RawStory) January 28, 2024

They aren't trying to get attention in the scene in the movie. They are actually trying to “preserve error” so they can ask the appellate court to fix the mistake the trial court made.

Let me explain what an appeal is:

You go to the appellate court by asking them to correct the lower court. You can’t do that if you didn’t give the trial court a chance to correct their error. An objection during trial means the evidence/testimony being offered should not be considered. If the court allows it anyway, you have grounds for an appeal. (Whether they are sufficient grounds is another matter.) 

But unless you preserve the error, you can’t appeal. EOD.

“Let me ruin the suspense for everyone. Trump doesn't have an appeal," he said on Friday. "I know the talking heads on TV (who have never tried a case or appealed a jury verdict) have to mention it. Here's why it isn't going to fly." 

Manookian went on to say that, in order to have a meritorious case on appeal, "you have to preserve a reversible error at the trial level." 

"This is why you hire competent counsel. You need someone who actually knows the rules of evidence and procedure. Alina Habba had no clue what was occurring throughout the trial," he added. "She not only failed to preserve any remote grounds for appeal, like a moron, she repeatedly and unintentionally waived them over and over." 

He went on to include an example of Habba bungling the potential for a reversal.  

"For example, she kept saying 'no objection' as exhibits were entered into evidence. It appeared to me that she was saying that because she that's something she had heard real lawyers say before," he said Friday. "Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, what she was doing over and over was waiving his ability to appeal over those evidentiary issues. Because she is a moron who would rather *play* lawyer than do the research to *be* a lawyer." 

Manookian then concluded: "There's no appeal here. And because people have asked me in the past, no, there is no such thing as an incompetent counsel defense in civil cases. That's for criminal matters. Take this verdict to the bank."

So basically, Habba is down so deep she has to look up to see bottom. And she may think she can “play smart,” but there’s no evidence of it.

Habba might figure this out when she files a motion for new trial, if the Judge explains she didn’t preserve her error for that necessary preliminary step (the motion for new trial) to filing an appeal.

(I do seem to recall Habba made a few objections which were overruled. That doesn’t automatically give her grounds for an appeal, because the error has to be serious enough to lead to a reversal. Sometimes an “error” is not really worth preserving.)

Trump may not have to worry about appeal bond.