Update: E. Jean Carroll got paid, despite Trump having "stall[ed] this case for years”

More than three years after a jury's verdict, Trump ran out of options to avoid paying the woman who, a jury found in 2023, he had sexually abused and defamed.

Jul 09, 2026

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK E. JEAN CARROLL, Plaintiff, USDS SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 7/8/2026 No. 22 Civ. 10016 (LAK) v. DONALD J. TRUMP, Defendant. ORDER DIRECTING DISBURSEMENT OF DEPOSITED FUNDS FROM THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT

[Update, 12:20 p.m. July 14: Law Dork confirmed that funds totaling more than $5.62 million were transferred to E. Jean Carroll on Tuesday.

“Three years ago, a unanimous nine-person jury found President Trump liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll. Today, we are pleased to report that she has received the damages payment the jury awarded her as a result of that verdict,” Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s lawyer, said in a statement.]

After a flurry of court filings on Wednesday, it appeared that E. Jean Carroll will finally get paid the $5 million, plus interest, that a jury decided Donald Trump owed her after they found in May 2023 that he sexually abused her decades earlier and defamed her in the time since.

Earlier Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered that Carroll get her $5 million plus interest after the U.S. Supreme Court denied Trump’s appeal in the case last week.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that: 1. The Clerk is respectfully directed to disburse from CRIS the value of the principal Judgment, which amounts to $5,000,000.00, to the IOLTA account of Kaplan Martin LLP on behalf of Plaintiff E. Jean Carroll, using the disbursing information that has been transmitted to the Clerk of Court by counsel for Plaintiff. The Clerk is further respectfully directed to disburse from CRIS the value of the post- judgment interest, computed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, that has accrued as of the date of this order, to the IOLTA account of Kaplan Martin LLP on behalf of Plaintiff E. Jean Carroll, using the disbursing information that has been transmitted to the Clerk of Court by counsel for Plaintiff. 3. The Clerk is further respectfully directed to terminate Dkt 232. SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2026 luntaren Lewis A. Kaplay United States District Judge

The order from Kaplan, a Clinton appointee who oversaw the case, directed the clerk of court to disburse the money, already put aside and in the court’s control, to Carroll’s lawyers.

Trump’s lawyers appealed and sought an immediate administrative stay from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Given Trump’s appeal, Kaplan then issued an opinion to back up Wednesday’s order. The conclusion: Trump “has been stalling this case for years. ... It is time for him to ‘do equity’ and pay the judgment.”

In the last analysis, defendant has been stalling this case for years. A jury unanimously concluded that he sexually abused and defamed plaintiff and awarded her damages accordingly. The judgment on that verdict has been upheld on appeal. En banc rehearing has been denied. The Supreme Court has denied certiorari without dissent. It is time for him to "do equity" and pay the judgment. Dated: SO ORDERED. July 8, 2026 6. M Lewis Al Kaplan United States District Judge

Carroll’s lawyers, led by Roberta Kaplan (no relation), then opposed Trump’s Second Circuit request, and Judge Eunice Lee, a Biden appointee to the appeals court, denied the administrative stay request in a brief order issued at 9:53 p.m.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the g'h day of July, two thousand twenty-six. Before: Eunice C. Lee, Circuit Judge. E. Jean Carroll, Plaintiff - Appellee, ORDER Docket No. 26-1840 V. Donald Trump, Defendant - Appellant. Appellant moves for an immediate administrative stay of the district court's July 8, 2026 order authorizing disbursement of deposited funds held in the court's registry, while the Court considers Appellant's forthcoming motion for a stay pending appeal. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for an administrative stay is DENIED. See Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 433-36 (2009) (discussing stay factors). For the Court: Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court

As of 11 p.m., there is no notification of any Supreme Court filing.

Law Dork will have more on this developing story as appropriate.

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?