A panel of New York appeals court judges appeared skeptical about the gargantuan $454 million civil fraud judgment Donald Trump was dealt after he was found liable for business fraud — with one jurist calling it “troubling.”
The former president is attempting to reverse or reduce the judgment of $354 million — plus an additional $100 million in interest — after a judge sided with New York Attorney General Letitia James, who argued in a lawsuit that Trump inflated his net worth by billions to get better loan and insurance terms.
Trump’s lawyers, who have called Judge Arthur Engoron’s February ruling “draconian, unlawful, and unconstitutional,” appeared before a five-judge panel of a Manhattan appeals court Thursday to plead their case.
Some judges appeared receptive to changing the bond.
Judge Peter Moulton questioned whether James’ lawsuit turned into “something it was not meant to do.”
Moulton observed that the “immense penalty in this case is troubling.”
Trump attorney D. John Sauer argued that James’ lawsuit stretched New York consumer protection laws. There were “no victims” and “no complaints” about Trump’s businesses from lenders or insurers, Sauer claimed.
The lawyer claimed the case was “a clear-cut violation of the statute of limitations,” noting transactions used in the non-jury trial.
If the verdict is not overturned, he warned, “people can’t do business in real estate” confidently.
Trump, who has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing since James first brought the suit against him, was not present.
Engoron ruled that Trump, his company and top executives including sons Eric and Don Jr. deceived banks by inflating Trump’s wealth on financial statements — allowing them to obtain favorable loans which they used to reap profits.
Trump’s legal team said the initial requested bond was “unprecedented for a private company” and that posting full amount was a “practical impossibility.”
In a brief submitted in July to the Appellate Division, the mid-level state appeals court, Trump’s lawyers argued that the financial statements he submitted to banks actually understated his wealth, and there was no indication that any of the lenders were financially harmed.
His legal team has also claimed James’ suit against Trump was politically motivated.
The Appellate Division typically rules about a month after arguments wrap up — meaning a final decision could come before Election Day on Nov. 5.
Three of the five judges who heard Thursday’s arguments must agree in order to alter the outcome.
If the court rules against Trump, the former president can appeal to New York’s highest court and, potentially, the US Supreme Court — though that would mean a final decision would come no sooner than 2026.
The former commander-in-chief has vowed to fight the case “all the way up to the US Supreme Court if necessary.”
With Post wires
