Trump grilled in court over contract dispute

Story originally appeared on USA Today.

Donald Trump takes the witness stand to defend himself in a breach-of-contract lawsuit brought by a former business partner.

NEW YORK — Real estate mogul Donald Trump sat on the hot seat Friday, instead of barking "You're fired" at would-be apprentices on TV.

Testifying in Manhattan Supreme Court over a contract dispute, the star of All-Star Celebrity Apprentice was grilled by a plaintiff lawyer over his decision to halt checks to a firm involved in landing a licensing deal that paid him at least $3 million for the use of his well-known name.

Trump tried to answer yes-no questions with repeated interjections that supported his version of events. But the co-author of Think Big and Kick Ass in Business and in Life found himself uncharacteristically silenced by Justice Eileen Brantsen, who's presiding over the jury trial.

"Mr. Trump, please, evidence is a question and an answer," said Bransten in one of two mini-scoldings she gave him from the bench. "Please refrain from anything else."

But he still managed to argue that it was fellow TV star Regis Philbin who first suggested the licensing agreement to him, not the company that's suing him.

"This all happened because of the success of The Apprentice," Trump also insisted.

The case centers on Trump's dealings with ALM International, a New York firm that sought clothing industry licensing deals on his behalf. ALM helped arrange a 2004 meeting with executives of apparel giant PVH, formerly known as Phillips-Van Heusen. With ALM involved in subsequent negotiations, PVH ultimately licensed Trump's name for a line of dress shirts and formal neckware.

In the acrimonious, ALM alleges Trump improperly halted its payments in 2008 after paying the firm approximately $300,000 over 11 consecutive quarters — a period in which court records show the Donald personally signed checks to the firm for its efforts.

"Mr. Trump decided he didn't want to pay anymore, notwithstanding the fact that there was an agreement that my client get 10% of whatever Mr. Trump got for each and every time the contract with PVH was renewed and continued," ALM attorney Jay Itkowitz argued during opening statements on Tuesday.

Trump attorney Jeffrey Goldman argued in his opening response that the apparel deal wasn't signed until after an agreement that authorized ALM to seek marketing opportunities for Trump had expired. The agreement stated ALM had to be involved in "significant negotiations" to collect on any licensing deal, and that stipulation wasn't met, Goldman said.

"So we submit that when you hear all of that, nothwithstanding all the noise about who my client is, that you will find, based upon the writings, that there was no such contract for us to breach," Goldman told the jury. "And you will find, therefore, that plaintiff, notwithstanding the wealth of my client, is not entitled to any damages."

Far from settling the dispute, Trump instead wants to recover all or a part of the payments he contends were made in error.

The case is among several civil lawsuits nationwide that have alleged improper actions by Trump in marketing or other business deals collectively cost clients, buyers or associates millions of dollars in losses. The lawsuit also provides a glimpse at the management style of the well known real estate executive and TV star.

Trump has portrayed himself as a shrewd businessman in his best-selling The Art of the Deal and frequent pronouncements on a Twitter feed that lists more than 2 million followers. But on the witness stand Friday, he sought to characterize the ALM payments as a mistake by testifying that he regularly signs thousands of payment checks while only occasionally checking supporting documents.

Itkowitz had Trump examine a copy of the first payment check he'd signed to ALM, and asked whether he'd looked at the accompanying invoice.

"Depends on your definition of look," responded Trump, who on Friday sported a white dress shirt and deep red tie.

The plaintiff lawyer presented copy after copy of similar payment checks and invoices Trump signed to ALM over nearly a three-year period. He noted that the documents had been vetted, prepared and authorized by Trump staffers.

"If one of your executives authorized a check to someone who wasn't entitled to it, you'd call them into the boardroom, wouldn't you?" said Itkowitz, alluding to the location where Trump lectures and fires apprentices on his TV show.

"I would not be happy," said Trump.

Itkowitz, trying to counter defense claims that ALM failed to produce a licensing deal of the size stipulated in the firm's agreement with Trump, asked the mogul whether he or his staffers ever sent a written complaint to the company demanding better terms.

"Mr Trump, you're not a shy person, are you?" asked Itkowitz, when Trump said he was unaware of such a letter.

"I'm shyer than people think," responded Trump.

Itkowitz similarly asked whether Trump or his staffers ever wrote to an ALM representative disputing the firm's claim to a 10% commission on all royalties paid by PVH.

"Using the word 'wrote' on paper, I am not aware of," said Trump.

Defense lawyers, who indicated after Friday's trial session that Trump's testimony would bolster the defense case, will get a chance to have him offer a more favorable interpretation of the case with his scheduled return to the witness stand on Monday.

"Now he's saying it's all a mistake," said Itkowitz outside the courtroom Friday. "Ultimately, whether that was a mistake will be decided by the jury."