Posted on 09/26/2024 6:30:58 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
A New York appeals panel on Thursday appeared wary of the state’s civil fraud case against former President Trump that ended in a $464 million judgment against him and his business.
During arguments lasting more than an hour, the five-judge panel on the Appellate Division — New York’s midlevel appeals court — questioned whether any constraints apply to the law New York Attorney General Letitia James used against Trump.
The law gives the state sweeping power to bring actions against businesses that engage in “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business.”
“How do we draw a line, or at least put up some guardrails, to know when the AG [attorney general] is operating well within her broad — admittedly broad — sphere … and when she is going into an area that wasn’t intended for her jurisdiction?” Justice John Higgitt asked.
A lower judge in February ruled that Trump, the Trump Organization and top executives, including two of Trump’s sons, falsely altered Trump’s net worth on key financial statements to reap tax and insurance benefits.
He ordered them to pay a combined $464 million, plus interest, of which $454 million is owed by Trump alone, and exacted several other penalties. As of Thursday, interest on the judgment has surpassed $24.7 million, bringing the grand total to more than $489 million. That figure will continue to balloon until Trump pays.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
You won’t believe this....ALL 5 Justices on this panel are Dems. I’m shocked.
Soros’ Girls Friday are hopeless. They haven’t got a clue. They all need to be in jail and throw Chubby Bragg in with them to do their laundry.
“This seems to me like a case where “lack of standing” should have been used. No one actively involved complained, it was just lawfare against Trump.”
Exactly.
...... Yikes .... Time to send that Appeals Panel back to Democrat Re-Education Camp ... Looks like their previous sessions may have started to wear off ......
.
This is how our legal system works in blue states. They sue conservatives for all sorts of crazy things and even if you ultimately are vindicated, the legal fees bankrupt you. It may not work with trump since he so rich.
Get out of NY.
They need to toss the e jean carroll case too.
1. She couldn’t even tell us the year the incident happened.
2. She said it was in a busy dept store but she never screamed for help.
3. Carroll never filed a police report till 25 years later
4. The statute of limitations for her suit against trump had expired.
But suppose…: If no parties complained and the state brought the case…why is Trump being singled out (I ask rhetorically—we know why) and not the banks as well? If no one is complaining, they worked together, laws are broken (supposedly) between them, and the state pursues a case, should they not all be tried as co-conspirators?
Pleaseeee! Pfft…don’t make anything out of this headline. The corrupt judges get their orders from the DC SWAMP and won’t go against the machine! The headline is full of CACA! 💩 ignore. We know better these are corrupted bought communist black robes! We have been down this road before.
If it wasnt Trump this wouldn’t be a case so it’s not a clear thing thst they’ll overturn it since he’s still Trump.
These 5 democrat/marxist judges are like a kitten playing with a ball of twine on the living room floor.
Their questions are silly and assinine because the case itself is. New York State’s ONLY hope of stopping the bleeding of the states worldwide reputation is for this panel to claim this case is ABSURD on it’s face and severely mandamus the judge.
My guess is that even the Dems on the appellate court see the risks to New York’s business environment from politically-driven charges based on supposed frauds for normal business practices and transactions that do not have victims, complainants, or even any cognizable losses. The lack of a clear statutory basis for the prosecution also contravenes due process.
“This seems to me like a case where “lack of standing” should have been used.”
The statute of limitations has passed on the charged offense, so one should not need to argue beyond that.
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.