Posted on 03/18/2024 2:54:43 PM PDT by NYer
Attorneys for former President Donald Trump urged a New York appeals court again on March 18 to remove or lower the $464 million bond President Trump must pay in less than a week as he tries to appeal a more than $350 million judgment from a civil fraud case.
“Enforcing an impossible bond requirement as a condition of appeal would inflict manifest irreparable injury on Defendants, and ‘defeat or impair [this Court’s] appellate jurisdiction,’” they argued.
The New York Attorney General’s office, which brought the civil fraud lawsuit, argued the appeals court had no authority to do so, while the defense pointed to other cases where it was found appropriate. The bond President Trump would have to put up would include backdated interest at 9 percent, adding another $100 million to the court ordered fine, which defense attorneys say has been improperly classified as disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.
They pointed out, as they had repeatedly, that the case named no victims, and therefore no one would be harmed in a delay of payment.
“The case involves no actual victims and no award of restitution, and [the attorney general] is fully protected by Defendants’ real-estate holdings. This factor alone warrants a stay,” the defense argued.
“The judgment seeks to destroy a successful business that employs many hardworking New Yorkers, has contributed approximately $300 million in taxes to public coffers just during the dates in question in this case, and has made historic contributions to the State and City of New York.”
Attorneys also revealed that 30 companies have already turned down the defense’s bond applications, attaching an affidavit from one of the brokers. A $454 million bond would require President Trump to have $1 billion in cash reserves, and four brokers have separate brokers have tried to obtain one so far to no avail.
After a 45-day bench trial, Justice Engoron had ruled for the plaintiffs on all claims, setting disgorgement at more than $350 million in line with the calculation an expert witness called by the state devised.
The judge had also put a ban on President Trump holding a director position in any financial or legal entity in the state for three years or taking out loans from any financial institution chartered in the state, and more limited bans for his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr.
Crucially, he extended the third-party monitorship of Trump Organization, with future reviews based on the monitor’s report for additional penalties including the extension of monitorship and even business certificate cancellations.
Defense attorneys argued the judgment was full of “manifold errors,” including the disregard of the statute of limitations set by the appeals court on both claims and disgorgement, the “ridiculously” valuing Mar-a-Lago between $18 million and $27 million, and “a massive disgorgement award in the absence of any evidence that misrepresentations caused the supposedly ill-gotten proceeds.”
“This case has no victims, no damages, and no actual financial losses,” the brief reads. Defendants argue that their business partners—including Deutsche Bank and the Zurich financial group—were “sophisticated” major financial institutions that testified they did their own analyses, were aware of the Trump Organization SFC disclaimers, and would not have changed the terms offered to Trump Organization “in light of the alleged ’misrepresentations’” in the SFCs as the attorney general presented at trial.
The massive figure is not an objective one; the state needed to tease out the portion of profit earned by Trump Organization that would have been a result only of inflated numbers presented on the SFCs.
The state presented an expert who created formulas to calculate the figure, and defense attorneys sought to show through their own expert testimonies that the profits were not “ill-gotten.”
In court filings, the defense also argued that several of these calculations relied on transactions that were outside of the statute of limitations, and faulted the trial court for allowing this. The attorney general had argued that the transactions were, under the continuing wrongs doctrine, distinct violations that each restarted the statute of limitations period, but the appeals court had previously found the doctrine did not apply to this case.
“The proper application of this Court’s previous ruling forecloses over 75 percent of the judgment,” the defense argued.
About $351 million of the disgorgement, after interest, falls outside the statute of limitations, the defense argued. This covers the loans for Trump National Doral Miami, Trump Golf Links at Ferry Point in New York, and Trump International Hotel and Tower Chicago, all in 2012, as well as the Old Post Office building in Washington in 2013.
Yet even with the statute of limitations properly applied, the defense argues there was no show of causation that the alleged misrepresentations on the SFCs resulted in these specific gains.
The case was brought under Executive Law § 63(12) and the defense argued the statutes are “inapplicable to the facts of this case in the first place,” and was “wrongfully relied upon” by both the state attorneys and court. The defense attorneys blasted the attorney general for using cases that had no relation to the Executive Law § 63(12), including one involving attorney disbarment, to argue against a stay of penalties during appeal.
The appeals court had already temporarily stayed some of the nonmonetary penalties ordered, which the defense argued should continue throughout the appeal.
I wonder if Trump is holding the money back to force these scum to arrest him in handcuffs with their usual theatrics of FBI storm troopers which will disgust the America. People with this third world crap and the posts the bond with a smile.
When Trump is President, The DIM Party will have supplied many tips and new ideas to fix the country.
How the hell are they getting away with this crap? What I’m getting from this is that they could impose any fine they wanted on him, “Pay a fine of $9,000 quadrillion dollars” and there’s nothing he can do?
It would be cheaper to hire a couple of rogue biker gangs to “sort out” the problem with the New Jerk “legal” system people responsible for this clown show.
This is a civil case, so no handcuffs. What it will do is get the properties taken out of his name and they become property of the State of New York.
Methinks Leticia is measuring the penthouse for drapes in her new office.
Odds are that he has capital assets, but not liquidable.
That’s the feeling I’m getting, he’s calling their bluff, giving them the proverbial middle finger “Go ahead make my day”
It’s a civil case, no criminal charges are involved, so no handcuffs. 🙄
Right.
Basically, if you want to dispute the political oligarchs of this backwater banana republic of ours, you're going to have to be rich, and be able to hire your own private army, like the Mexican cartels.
it does not seem constitutional
he is being denied due process
they can gut him financially before the appeal
My two cents? He has it. He wants them to get in a fury and let there hopes down. Tin foil hat off
They’ll just go after his assets to satisfy E. Jean Carroll
My thought is the best they can do is put a lien on some of his property.
Letitia wants to seize Trump Tower and rename it Immigrant Tower and seize his jet to fly it to Mexico and bring back illegals to live in the Tower.
Peekaboo Arms
Odds are that he has capital assets, but not liquidable.
—
and no bank will loan that much against them.
Maybe they are pressured not to?
“Pay a fine of $9,000 quadrillion dollars” and there’s nothing he can do?
they can gut him financially before the appeal
All part of the plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.