This article is pure wishful thinking.
The author is correct that a private party suing for fraud must show a loss. In New York, however, a law enacted in 1956 (at the urging of a Republican Attorney General) gives the Attorney General the power to sue for fraud even if there was no loss.
There was a prior appeal in this very case. It was partially successful – see full opinion at https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/appellate-division-first-department/2023/index-no-452564-22-appeal-no-553-case-no-2023-00717.html — as the appellate court dismissed the case against Ivanka Trump on other grounds (statute of limitations, because, unlike her brothers, she had stopped working for the Trump Organization years ago). The “no-harm” argument, however, was rejected. The appellate court stated: “We have already held that the failure to allege losses does not require dismissal of a claim for disgorgement under Executive Law § 63(12) (see People v Ernst & Young LLP, 114 AD3d 569, 569-570 [1st Dept 2014]).” That’s the governing precedent – and note that the Ernst & Young case was decided before Trump ever came down the escalator.
You think that’s a bad law? You’re entitled to your opinion, but the state legislature enacted the law. The court that will hear Trump’s latest appeal has already held that the law applies to this case. There’s no reason to think that the new appeal will produce a different result.
You don’t think the case is malicious prosecution? Queen Letitia campaigned on taking down Trump. There are no realtors in South Florida that I have heard say that the Mara Lago valuation was unreasonable on the Trump paperwork so the charges seem to be malicious.