A New York appeals court is preparing to listen to arguments in Donald Trump’s effort to reverse a civil fraud ruling that could potentially impact his real estate business and result in a loss of nearly half a billion dollars. The former president is challenging the judgment, claiming that the decision made by Judge Arthur Engoron was unjust and should be overturned.
New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office, which filed the lawsuit against Trump on behalf of the state, insists that Engoron’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence. The case revolves around allegations that Trump misrepresented his wealth over the years by inflating his assets on financial statements to deceive banks, insurers, and others in order to secure loans and make deals.
The ruling came after a lengthy 2 ½-month trial involving 40 witnesses, including Trump himself. Engoron found Trump, his company, and several executives liable for falsifying records, insurance fraud, and issuing false financial statements. The penalties initially totaled $363.9 million but have since increased to over $489 million with interest.
Oral arguments for Trump’s appeal are scheduled to take place before a five-judge panel at the Appellate Division, First Judicial Department in Manhattan. Both sides will have 15 minutes to present their case. Trump has enlisted D. John Sauer to argue on his behalf, while Judith Vale, New York’s deputy solicitor general, will represent James’ office.
Trump’s legal team argues that the penalties imposed on him are excessive, some claims should have been barred by the statute of limitations, and the state overstepped in policing private business transactions. They also claim that James improperly used a consumer protection statute against Trump.
James’ office refutes Trump’s arguments, stating that the appeal is filled with meritless claims and disregards overwhelming evidence of fraud and illegal activities on a large scale. The state contends that Trump systematically inflated his net worth by hundreds of millions of dollars to obtain loans and generate illicit profits.
Trump posted a $175 million bond in April to halt the judgment’s enforcement while he appeals. If the ruling stands, Trump and his co-defendants will be required to pay the full judgment amount, plus accruing interest. The Appellate Division is expected to deliver a ruling roughly a month after the oral arguments.
If either party is dissatisfied with the appellate court’s decision, they can pursue the case further to the state’s highest court or potentially the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump has stated his intention to challenge the ruling at every level if necessary, while James may seek to seize some of Trump’s assets if he fails to comply.
Since this is a civil case, jail time is not a possible outcome for Trump regardless of the legal proceedings.