Donald Trump fraud verdict: $364 million penalty in New York civil case

[Tinker Grey]

Donald Trump fraud verdict: $364 million penalty in New York civil case

The judge barred Donald Trump from holding executive office at a New York company and getting loans from New York banks for three years.

apnews.com

NEW YORK (AP) — A New York judge imposed a $364 million penalty Friday on Donald Trump, his companies and some executives, ruling that they engaged in a yearslong scheme to dupe banks and others with financial statements that inflated the former president’s wealth.

Trump, who built his reputation as a real estate titan, also was barred from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation for three years.

However, the judge backed away from an earlier ruling that would have dissolved the former president’s companies.


Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal.​

 

[NxNW]

Lots of meat on that nothingburger.

 

[Elliewaves]

Also it's in NY, so to appeal he has to put up like half the judgement into escrow and if the judgement is ignored then the state will start seizing assets.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

 

[7thKeeper]

Also it's in NY, so to appeal he has to put up like half the judgement into escrow and if the judgement is ignored then the state will start seizing assets.

From what I've heard, it has to be the full amount to appeal.

 

[NxNW]

 

[Servus]

"However, the judge backed away from an earlier ruling that would have dissolved the former president’s companies."

 

[Servus]

This will totally get Trump the megamillions he needs.

 

[RoBo1988]

NY governor Hochul says that Trump is "special" case. Other investors need not worry.

Hochul tells NY businesses not to fear about Trump verdict: ‘Nothing to worry about’

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) addressed New York business owners in a new interview and told them there was “nothing to worry about” after former President Trump was hit with a $355 million fine and a ban on conducting business in New York for three years. Hochul joined John Catsimatidis on...

ca.news.yahoo.com

 

[Vambram]

Critics have noted that Trump is the only person ever to be sued under an obscure New York fraud statute that does not require any harm be done, and that effectively criminalizes the everyday practice of real estate valuations in negotiations with banks.

Though Attorney General Letitia James — who ran for office promising to target Trump — claimed that no one is above the law, her case against Trump marks the only such case in the history of the state. And the staggering fine is likewise unprecedented.

Jonathan Turley points out another astonishing fact at the New York Post: before he can appeal, Trump must pay the whole fine:

Under New York law, Trump cannot appeal this ruling without depositing the full amount, including interest, in a court account. Even for Trump, $455 million is hard to come by. Likewise, a bond would require a company to guarantee payment for a defendant who has been barred from doing business in New York and is facing the need to liquidate much of his portfolio.
Nothing succeeds like excess for judges like Engoron. By imposing this astronomical figure, he can make it difficult or impossible for a defendant to appeal, absent declaring bankruptcy or selling off assets at distress prices.
The excessive fine and its basis raise serious statutory and constitutional questions. Many of us believe it should be substantially reduced or tossed out entirely.

Engoron also refused to allow Trump to mount any defense, declaring Trump guilty via summary judgment for the state.

 

[Paulos23]

Critics have noted that Trump is the only person ever to be sued under an obscure New York fraud statute that does not require any harm be done, and that effectively criminalizes the everyday practice of real estate valuations in negotiations with banks.

Maybe they should start going after everyone else. Goodness knows there are enough people who abuse the system.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Engoron also refused to allow Trump to mount any defense,

Not true, that's what half of the trial was. (The other half was prosecution.)

declaring Trump guilty via summary judgment for the state.

That's how civil trials work. Causes of action that are demonstrated beyond the standard of proof in pre-trial motions for summary judgment can be rules as such. The other side gets the same opportunity to reply with evidence of their own and challenges to the evidence (just like cross-examination) and typically there is a hearing too on the motion. In the case of NY v. Trump et al. Justice Engoron ruled in the NY AG's favor on *one* of the causes of action (the biggest one to be certain) after motions and arguments. The trial covered the other 6 or so causes of action and the penalties. There was no reason to spend court time on items with complete rulings.

 

[7thKeeper]

Maybe they should start going after everyone else. Goodness knows there are enough people who abuse the system.

And I'd be curious about that claim of "obscure" statute as to it's accuracy. Somehow I suspect that it's not quite as obscure as some would like to claim.

 

[Arcangl86]

Critics have noted that Trump is the only person ever to be sued under an obscure New York fraud statute that does not require any harm be done, and that effectively criminalizes the everyday practice of real estate valuations in negotiations with banks.

63 (12) has been around a long time, and James has particularly aggressive in using it. Granted this appears to be the first time it was used without an aggrieved consumer, but that doesn't matter. Even though usually used as a consumer protection statute there is no requirement in the law itself for a victim. As for supposedly criminalizing real estate valuations, there is a difference between presenting an optimistic valuation, and lying about material facts about the property that would substantially affect the value. That's what Trump did. It's one to say a particular piece of property is worth such-and-such an amount per sq-ft and another to say it is worth such-and-such a sq-ft and then claiming it is three times the size it actually is. That's one of the things he did.

Though Attorney General Letitia James — who ran for office promising to target Trump — claimed that no one is above the law, her case against Trump marks the only such case in the history of the state.

I've already addressed this.

And the staggering fine is likewise unprecedented.

My understanding is that no damages were award. The "fine" was a disgorgement, which is the giving up of profits obtained through illegal actions. Because of the value of some of the real estate in question, that was a large number.

Jonathan Turley points out another astonishing fact at the New York Post: before he can appeal, Trump must pay the whole fine:

Not actually true. He needs to post a bond for the same amount, but it's a bond which means he can get a bond company to pay the amount for a portion upfront. Of he could if he wanted to post the whole amount which would mean he doesn't have to pay anything assuming he wins. But either way it makes sense as a way to ensure that the appeal has some merit otherwise it would just clog up an already full court system.

Engoron also refused to allow Trump to mount any defense

If you mean by trial, that is true for only one part of the complaint. The other three causes of action were all debated in a trial since they involved significant questions of fact. The 63 (12) item though didn't require any questions of fact and so was decided by summary judgment. And summary judgement requires both parties to submit briefs so it's not accurate to say that Trump did not have a chance to mount a defense.

, declaring Trump guilty via summary judgment for the state.

Liable, not guilty.

 

[Vambram]

How many more wealthy conservative businessmen will the courts in New York sue under this obscure law that has very rarely been enforced this way?
It's important to note that most experts in this topic have told news sources that the so-called over valuing or even under valuing of property by owners is a very common practice in New York and other states. Yet, The Trump organization appears to have been singled out to be the one of the only ones targeted.

As for liberal wealthy businessmen, I have zero doubts that New York will care about enforcement of that law in this manner.

 

[Paulos23]

How many more wealthy conservative businessmen will the courts in New York sue under this obscure law that has very rarely been enforced this way?
It's important to note that most experts in this topic have told news sources that the so-called over valuing or even under valuing of property by owners is a very common practice in New York and other states. Yet, The Trump organization appears to have been singled out to be the one of the only ones targeted.

As for liberal wealthy businessmen, I have zero doubts that New York will care about enforcement of that law in this manner.

Who says they are going to be all conservative? Maybe they will just go after those that broke the law by a set amount to priorities?

 

[Vambram]

Who says they are going to be all conservative? Maybe they will just go after those that broke the law by a set amount to priorities?

Maybe they should. But they won't.

 

[7thKeeper]

Maybe they should. But they won't.

Anything to back this up besides your own bias?

 

[Vambram]

Anything to back this up besides your own bias?

The history of favoritism in NY towards the left and liberalism.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Trump is unable to make $464 million [including the interest] bond in civil fraud case, his lawyers tell court​

“The amount of the judgment, with interest, exceeds $464 million, and very few bonding companies will consider a bond of anything approaching that magnitude,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

Potential underwriters are seeking cash to back the bond, not properties, according to Trump’s lawyers.