A panel of judges on the New York Court of Appeals appears skeptical about Donald Trump's massive $454 million civil fraud judgment after he was found liable for business fraud, with one legal scholar calling it “It's alarming,” he said.
The former president was awarded $354 million plus $100 million in additional interest after a judge sided with New York Attorney General Letitia James, who claimed in a lawsuit that Trump inflated his net worth by billions of dollars to make improvements. It seeks to have Dollar's judgment overturned or reduced. Loan and insurance terms.
Trump's lawyers appeared Thursday before a five-judge panel on the Manhattan Court of Appeals to argue that Judge Arthur Engoron's February ruling was “draconian, illegal and unconstitutional.”
Some judges seemed open to changing the bond.
Judge Peter Moulton questioned whether James' case had become “unintended”.
Mr Moulton added: “The large fines in this case are concerning.”
Trump lawyer D. John Sauer argued that James' lawsuit extends New York's consumer protection law. Sauer claimed there were “no victims” and “no complaints” from lenders or insurance companies regarding Trump's business.
Lawyers argued the case was a “clear violation of the statute of limitations,” citing the deal used in the non-jury trial.
If the ruling is not overturned, “people will not be able to run their real estate business with confidence,” he warned.
Trump, who has repeatedly denied wrongdoing since James first filed the suit, was not present.
Engoron alleges that President Trump, his company, and his management team, including his sons Eric and Don Jr., profited by defrauding banks into obtaining favorable loans by inflating President Trump's assets on financial statements. It was decided that
Trump's lawyers said the initial bond requested was “unprecedented for a private company” and that it would be “practically impossible” to account for the full amount.
In briefs filed with the Appellate Division in July, Trump's lawyers argued that the financial statements he submitted to banks actually understated his assets and that no lender could It also claimed that there was no evidence of economic damage.
His lawyers also argued that Mr. James' case against Mr. Trump was politically motivated.
The Appellate Division typically issues a decision about a month after arguments are concluded, so a final decision could come before the Nov. 5 vote.
Three of the five justices who heard Thursday's arguments would need to agree for the outcome to change.
If the court rules against Trump, the former president could appeal to New York's highest court and possibly the Supreme Court, but a final ruling would not be made until 2026 at the latest. It will be.
The former commander-in-chief vowed to fight the case “all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.”
with post wire
