NEW YORK — US District Judge Lewis Kaplan denied Donald Trump's request for additional time to pay a $5.8 million civil judgment owed to E. Jean Carroll on July 4, 2024. The judgment amount is being held in an escrow account.

Trump's attorneys had requested more time, stating that his new lead counsel, Josh Halpern, needed to become familiar with the facts and procedural circumstances of the case. Roberta Kaplan, Carroll's lawyer, stated that the request for an extension appeared to be "little more than yet another play for time." She added that Trump had ample opportunity to retain new counsel, noting that he had nominated Justin Smith for the court of appeals more than five months prior.

Judge Kaplan's rejection of the motion was recorded as a text-only order in an entry on the case docket, without an accompanying formal written order. Trump has until Tuesday to either release the money to Carroll or file additional arguments regarding non-payment.

The civil judgment stems from a New York jury's conclusion that Trump sexually abused Carroll in 1996 and defamed her after she publicly described the attack in 2019. The U.S. Supreme Court declined Trump's request to review the jury's 2023 verdict.

In a filing, Roberta Kaplan wrote, "They can only assume that defendant is seeking to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing." In 2023, Trump posted a statement on his Truth Social platform regarding the proceedings: "What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be, speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair 'trial'." Lewis Kaplan was appointed to the federal judiciary during the presidency of Bill Clinton.

This case is separate from a 2024 Manhattan civil jury award of $83.3 million to Carroll for defamation. That second case raises questions of presidential immunity, as it relates to statements Trump made about Carroll during his first term as president.