Mary Trump (left) pictured during an ABC News interview in July 2020 about her book ‘Too Much and Never Enough’ (ABC News/YouTube screengrab); Donald Trump (right) pictured in Manhattan court on May 14, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle, Pool)
A New York appellate court on Thursday affirmed the denial of Mary Trump’s bid to dismiss a breach of contract claim in her uncle Donald Trump’s lawsuit over her tell-all book and participation as a source of New York Times revelations about his tax returns.
Donald Trump’s suit was filed in Dutchess County in September 2021, more than a year after Mary Trump’s book “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man” was published, despite intense litigation during the latter days of her uncle’s presidency to stop it from going public.
In June 2023, New York Supreme Court Justice Robert Reed partially granted Mary Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, jettisoning Donald Trump’s claims of unjust enrichment and breach of duty. At the same time, Reed declined to dismiss the first cause of action in the former president’s suit, which alleged that his niece breached a contract by violating the confidentiality and non-disclosure terms of a 2001 Trump family settlement agreement traceable all the way back to the aftermath of Fred Trump’s death.
The lawsuit alleged that the defendant “committed a material breach” in two ways, one by “disclosing, assisting and/or providing confidential information” to the New York Times during Trump’s presidency, information that led to the publication of details on “dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud” as evidenced by a “vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records” the Times analyzed.
Mary Trump, the suit further said, breached the settlement agreement by publishing a book with “accounts and descriptions of her relationship with Plaintiff and the facts and circumstances underlying the Estate Actions […] without the prior consent or authorization of Plaintiff.”
Though the case alleged an “insidious plot” between Mary Trump, the New York Times, and three of its reporters, the claims against the newspaper defendants were tossed out in May 2023, leaving Donald Trump on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Still, part of the case against Mary Trump would live on, and on Thursday, the New York Supreme Court Apellate Division, First Department, ruled that the motion to dismiss was “properly denied because the breach of contract claim has a substantial basis in law.”
“The subject confidentiality provision is not unenforceable on the grounds of public policy,” the ruling said. “While issues of fact exist as to the confidentiality provision’s meaning and scope, it is not so vague as to be unenforceable as a matter of law, and any ambiguity can be resolved through examination of parol evidence to discern the intent of the parties.”
“Issues of fact exist as to whether the information disclosed by defendant (that is the subject of this suit) or plaintiff’s prior statements (that are relied upon by defendant) are subject to the confidentiality provision,” the court continued. “Because the confidentiality agreement contains no fixed duration, the court must ‘inquire into the intent of the parties’ and determine – ‘if a duration may be fairly and reasonably fixed by the surrounding circumstances and the parties’ intent.””
As a result of the decision, the court ruled, the former president can “[a]t a minimum” pursue “nominal damages […] even in the absence of actual damages.” Trump’s complaint sought “no less” than $100,000,000.
Donald Trump attorney Alina Habba celebrated the ruling in a victory lap on X.
“The Appellate Division has affirmed the validity of President Trump’s substantial claim against Mary Trump,” Habba said. “We look forward to resuming this suit to ensure she is held fully accountable for her blatant and egregious breach of contract.”
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
