NEW YORK — Rudy Giuliani faced a contempt of court decision on Monday for failing to adequately respond to information requests related to a substantial $148 million defamation judgment awarded to two Georgia election workers.
Judge Lewis J. Liman announced his ruling after Giuliani testified for the second consecutive day at a contempt hearing. The judge said Giuliani “willfully violated a clear and unambiguous order of this court” by disregarding a December 20 deadline for submitting evidence needed to determine if he could retain ownership of a Palm Beach, Florida, condominium, or if it was classified as a vacation home.
Due to Giuliani’s failure to provide complete information, including the full names and a complete list of his doctors and other professional service providers, the judge indicated he would presume no relevant evidence existed in Florida after January 1, 2024, when Giuliani claimed he established Palm Beach as his permanent residence.
During the hearing, Liman restricted Giuliani from submitting testimony regarding emails or texts that might prove his residency in Florida. He criticized Giuliani’s submission of only a limited number of documents, labeling them as “cherry picked” and noted the absence of phone records, emails, or texts pertinent to his residence claims. Liman remarked that he would consider these evidentiary gaps when assessing the case.
Giuliani’s testimony included about three hours in person on Friday and two hours remotely from his Palm Beach home on Monday. By the time the ruling was made, he was no longer present in the courtroom. His attorney, Joseph Cammarata, emphasized that both Giuliani and the election workers were absent at the ruling, stating the outcome was “no surprise.” Cammarata criticized the legal proceedings as part of a broader attack on Giuliani grounded in political motivations.
“This case represents lawfare and a misuse of the legal system in New York City,” he stated. He further compared this case with the state criminal prosecution against President-elect Donald Trump, arguing both were tactics employed by Democrats to leverage legal avenues against political opponents.
As proceedings continued, Giuliani appeared against an American flag backdrop, which he later changed upon the judge’s request, and displayed a pocket watch belonging to his grandfather, stating he was prepared to relinquish it.
Giuliani later acknowledged to the court that he sometimes withheld requested information, believing it to be overly broad or as a potential “trap” set by the plaintiffs. Judge Liman described one of Giuliani’s defenses as “preposterous,” indicating that suspicion regarding the motives of the election workers’ lawyers did not justify his noncompliance with court orders.
Following the ruling, Giuliani expressed through a publicist that the situation represented a tragic degradation of the justice system, equating the hearings to “charades” rather than legitimate legal proceedings.
Lawyers representing the election workers argued that Giuliani has consistently disregarded court mandates since being found liable for defaming their clients for mistakenly accusing them of ballot tampering during the 2020 presidential election. Although he has surrendered a Mercedes-Benz and his New York apartment, he has reportedly failed to provide necessary documentation for the monetization of his assets and has not returned significant personal items, including sports memorabilia.
Giuliani confirmed ongoing efforts to locate a missing Joe DiMaggio jersey, stating he was currently unaware of its whereabouts.
As the trial on whether Giuliani must relinquish his Florida condominium and World Series rings approaches on January 16, his legal team remains optimistic about a favorable outcome on appeal.
