Trump's massive $500M civil fraud fine in AG Tish James' case thrown out by NY appeals court
By: Ben Kochman
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A New York appeals court Thursday threw out the massive $464 million judgment dealt to President Trump after he was found liable at a civil trial for business fraud.
The Appellate Division, First Department, overturned the whopping fine in the case in which Trump, 79, was found to have fraudulently inflated his net worth by billions of dollars over a decade to get better loan and insurance terms.
Trump would have had to pay a total of more than $500 million, including more than $100 million in interest, had the February 2024 ruling from Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron been upheld.
The appeal court's decision follows a theatrical, 11-week trial that threatened to derail Trump's image as a real estate tycoon — and brand him as a fraudster — as he campaigned to regain the White House.
Trial evidence revealed that Trump secured cushy interest rates between 2011 and 2021 after goosing up the value of assets like his Big Apple penthouse and Mar-a-Lago estate on financial papers.
Trump's business falsely claimed that his Trump Tower triplex was 30,000 square feet — rather than its true size of 11,000 square feet — and used the phony figures to pump up the pad's value to $327 million in 2015 after claiming it was worth $80 million just four years earlier, evidence showed.
Trump also valued Mar-a-Lago at $517 million on a financial filing despite his own tax broker admitting to listing the palatial estate's "market value" at just $27 million in 2020, a witness revealed.
Trump tax representative Michael Corbiciero testified that he used the lowball valuation — which is far below the estate's value if it were sold as a private home — by calling the estate a "social club," a distinction that scored Trump juicy tax breaks.
The deed for Mar-A-Lago bars Trump from selling the estate as anything but a social club, trial evidence shows.
Trump nonetheless told banks and insurers that the Palm Beach estate was worth $517 million, and boasted during the trial that it was actually worth up to $1.5 billion — which would make it four times more valuable than the most expensive private home listed in the country.
"The frauds found here leap off the page and shock the conscience," Engoron wrote in his ruling.
The ruling comes after some members of the five-judge appeals panel appeared skeptical in September of the merits of the lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, which led to the trial.
Judge Peter Moulton called the size of the penalty "troubling" and questioned if the law James had used to sue Trump — which doesn't technically require someone to be "harmed" — had "morphed into something it was not meant to do."
The case roiled the soon-to-be 47th president, who chose to leave the campaign trial for several days to attend the trial, calling the proceedings a "political witch hunt" and insisting that he did "nothing wrong."
Engoron and James are both elected Democrats, and James campaigned on a promise to investigate Trump, calling the then-president a "con man" and ″carnival barker."
Trump's lawyers argued that the case had no "victims," and that "sophisticated" companies like Deutsche Bank did their own research before entering into the deals, and were all paid back in full.
But James' office argued that Trump's fudged financial filings were nonetheless harmful to the marketplace as a whole — and Engoron agreed.
"The next group of lenders to receive bogus statements might not be so lucky," he wrote in his ruling.
Trump has posted a bond of $175 million as he appeals the ruling, and will get the chance to further challenge it next in the Empire State's highest appeals court, the New York State Court of Appeals.
No personal insults
No death wishes of any individual
Trolling, taunting, spamming, references to "MAGA" and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the term white supremacist or Christian Nationalist will be deleted.
Tags
Who is online
88 visitors
A partisan hack DA used a law NOBODY has ever been charged with against a political opponent brought before a partisan hack judge? Who didn't see this coming?
You do realize that the original ruling was NOT thrown out, he was found guilty and that guilty verdict stands. What this appellate court found was that the fine imposed was "excessive". That's it, that's all.
I get that conservatives want to cheer this and pretend this somehow vindicates their Fuhrer, but they should at least know how stupid it makes them look when they don't even read the article and just jump to conclusions.
But what I asked in #2 was what does that mean? Does this now go back down to Judge Engoron to redo the penalty phase? Is any dollar amount penalty dropped completely? What does it mean?
All it says so far is that they agree that Trump and his company was liable and the injunction to curb the Trump Organization in New York remains. I don't see where anybody is saying Trump has been vindicated. Maybe you can point it out.
You do realize that I just posted the article. You have issue take it up with the courts.
I have no issue with the court, I took issue with your claim that somehow this ruling was because the case was brought by, as you claim, a "partisan hack DA" on a "law NOBODY has ever been charged" "brought before a partisan hack judge". If that was your interpretation of the article you posted then you clearly didn't even read it because nothing you claim had anything to do with why the appeals judge threw out the award amount. How is this not stunningly obvious to you?
Feel free to prove me wrong. It's not like this is the first time I've said that.
The original ruling proved your opinion wrong or at best irrelevant and this appellate court upholds the ruling; the only change is that the fine was found excessive.
And I doubt it will be the last time you present what amounts to a personal opinion with nothing to back it up.
Gee...imagine that. A partisan judge and a corrupt DA in cahoots to fine their nemesis an excessive fine.
Common sense folk know there would not even had been charges if Trump was president with a "D" next to his name
It DID prove a partisan hack DA and partisan hack judge were involved.
You're right. Until proven wrong I'll keep saying it.
Quite the contrary.
You know, none of that is true, and does not reflect the finding of the court.
Now all you have to do is prove it as such.
You don’t have to read very far into the decision to find this:
Trump is on social media claiming total vindication and victory. Thats all they need to know.
That's not the flex you think it is. Being found liable wasn't the goal. The goal was to bankrupt him. It's not even a "conviction".
Cringe.
I actually predicted it right here. Gee, it sucks being right all the time.
BTW, congrats on submitting the news story of the day.
From the vindicated:
I was tied up this morning over on X, where this was a big story. I saw some very interesting comments on this especially from Jonathan Turley.
There is a moral to this one. For all the New Yorkers who voted for Letitia James, the old adage applies:
"Tell me who your friends are, and I'll tell you who you are"
The story of the day was Russia saying there will be no Putin Zelensky meeting , and/or Trump going out on police patrol tonight, and/or Trump telling a far right radio host that he has ended 10 wars, three of which he didnt even know about.
That's their problem.
More than we've seen from 99% of democrats and the left.
"Far right radio host" that you'll be listening to.
A future story, I'm anticipating, is Letitia James going to trial for mortgage fraud, civil right violations, and documentation fraud. I wonder if she can get judge Engoron?
Funny how partisan activity backfires. How quickly they forget that "Nobody is above the law".
I seriously doubt she'll get a "friendly" judge.
BTW - Welcome back.
I wouldn't count on anything.
BTW - Welcome back.
Thanks. I spent my past few mornings on X. It was a welcome change.
So they threw out the penalty but upheld the findings of liability and the injunction on the Trump Organization.
Legal beagles, what does this mean? Does this then go back down to Judge Engoron to redo the penalty phase?
But I do love the dissent that is also included in the above linked article. It strongly reaffirms that the prosecution was political in nature. I'm sure there are some here who will argue that it was not political, amazing what some can see.
I will take legal experts word for the fact that the prosecution was unusual.
But Trump is hardly "innocent" , he has been pulling this crap regarding switching valuations of his properties for decades. When its tax time he claims their worth is small, and when he wants loans off them he says they are priceless. It seems to me this is very unethical. The "defense" is "everyone does it". Who cares if "everyone does it", it is wrong.
Actually I believe the defense was that the banks and the state are responsible for determining property values for loans and taxes. Everybody does have the right to question the valuation given and it is the responsibility of the banks and the state to determine the proper value.
The defense of 'everyone does it' would more apply to the simple issue that this prosecution was very political in nature, yet Trump was the only one who was taking to trial on this. IMO it was the prosecution who was much more unethical. She ran for office on the promise to prosecute Trump, she took an old misdemeanor charge and inflated it to a felony and the judge allowed for the elevating crime (which was used to inflate the misdemeanor to a felony) to be a 'pick one from this list' issue.
As has been pointed out time after time after time right here on NT. ANYONE taking the word of an owner as to the value of property of ANY kind is asking for trouble. Financial institutions have appraisers, as do taxation agencies, to appraise and SET the value. Common practice. Done on my mortgage as well as my taxes. My opinion had bupkis to do with any of it. If these morons didn't do their due diligence, It falls on them. As no one got screwed (money paid back) this is bullshit and the blame lies solely with those agencies/institutions.
If they took his word or anyone else's, they are the morons after the fact.
If I remember correctly, the bank DID appraise the property and was satisfied. They approved the loans and testified that everything had been repaid without issue.
So what , Trump threatens to sue local taxing entities if they do not give him a lower appraisal. Its not worth it to them in some cases.
Don't you have the same right? After all, it's America where anybody can sue anyone and/or anything for whatever they want. So what?
Then it is their problem. Not Trump's. He took advantage of their stupidity and showed their true colors. Too lazy to do the necessary work to assure everything is on the up and up. They didn't, didn't get hurt WHATSOEVER, and no one else did either. This was a total witch hunt right up there with about 30 more with the sme objective............
So, lying on financial statements and loan applications is just "taking advantage" of the "stupidity" of those who think an applicant would be truthful on such applications because it is actually illegal to lie on them?
It never ceases to amaze me at how willing some are to abandon any semblance of morality in order to defend their cult leader.
Hmmm. What makes you think there was an application? Even so, no one I know of gets a blank space within which to give a value that they think it is worth. That was up to the appraisers. And one can argue all they want but in the end, the institution and their actions, or lack thereof, is responsible fro granting the funds. Perhaps you can come up with a copy of said application(s) (even blank) where such a spot to fill in value exists in the "applicant section"?
Oh, and by the way. When one uses AI to answer, it should be noted that that is where it came from.
Details to be ignored by the triggered.
Always. Even ignored by the partisan DA and judge in order to push an agenda. Could be viewed as election interference in a way.
So when former Biden officials are charged and found guilty of various charges brought on by Bondi, we will not see any seeds about "weaponization" or " revenge" or anything else you like to accuse Trump for?
So you will be OK if Schiff and Tish get charged and found guilty of mortgage fraud?
Good to know.
We really need to stop this misuse of the word "lie". Differences of opinion are not "lies".
Trump does lie. No question. This was not one of those.
Trump submitted a valuation of a property. Property valuations are always somewhat subjective, even on two homes next door to each other with the same floor plan.
Valuation on Mar a Lago is entirely subjective. There is no other property in the world even close to similar. It's location, size, historic significance, and ownership history all add significant levels of unique value.
Like anything, it is "worth" whatever somebody will agree to pay for it, which will be impossible to guess until it actually goes on the market. In an era where people pay $1 billion plus for a yacht and give away $500 million private jets, it's certainly not difficult to imagine somebody paying $1.5 billion for one of the most prestigious private residences in the world.
I’m not qualified to re-litigate the facts, but the trial court found he intentionally committed fraud, and that his testimony to the court was not credible. The appeals courts have agreed.
I realize what the court said. The issue all along has been the blatant political bias of both the prosecutor and the judge, acting on an obscure NY statute despite the supposed "victims" of the fraud stating they were not defrauded.
They created a kangaroo court where politics are more important than justice.
The appeals court also found the case had been properly brought.
The comments from the judges seem to question that.
There is dissent, as there is in many cases.
Your legal expertise obviously exceeds mine, but it seems like this dissent is at least a little unusual.
One of the majority judges said the suit cause the law to "morph into something it was not meant to do."
One of the dissenting judges was more direct, calling it "political hygiene" and stating that the AG attempted to use the law to gain "essentially limitless power to prosecute her political enemies."
Those don't seem like normal statements from judges.
I'm curious as to where it all goes from here. Does it go back to kangaroo court or does it go higher up on another appeal? Or does this just mean he doesn't have to pay anything and we all roll on down the road?
Honestly, this seems like this law should be reviewed. If it can be this easily co-opted for a blatant attempt at the complete destruction of a political opponent, that's a significant systemic problem.
I have to say I don’t see an order to recalculate the fine anywhere, and they don’t reduce it to a specific number. They do say something to the effect that the monitoring of the company (which will continue) in addition to everything else associated with the legal process seems sufficient. All things considered, that seems reasonable, and is probably how most of these cases are resolved.
FALSE:
"A fifth judge said New York Attorney General Letitia James should not have brought the case in the first place."
Appeals court throws out Trump's $454 million civil fraud judgment - ABC News
"While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution," Judges Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton wrote in one of several opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling."
Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against US President Donald Trump - The Economic Times
Funny as hell. I can hear the sky screaming all the way here in Michigan.
It's been a bad year for the whiny little bitches on the left.
Good...well deserved.
When the Governor had to come out and publicly announce the State wouldn't treat other businesses like this, it was clear the entire process was as corrupt as could be.
I can't wait until Bondi comes out with indictments against quite a few former Biden puppet masters.
Our "friends" on the left hear will start screeching about weaponization and crying that Trump just wants revenge.
I have 2 boxes of microwave popcorn at home waiting to see the show.
It will be fabulous.
What I find truly amazing, well, a little, is the fact that all this info about the bullshit that went down in 2016 and beyond is actually the left's J6 if you think about it. The only difference was that they were most times behind closed doors doing their plotting instead of out in the open. The actions were a clear attempt to defeat democracy and install someone else but actually just to get Trump.
I’m really not surprised they found the fine to be excessive.
Everything else about the case - the liability for fraud, the monitoring imposed, etc. - was upheld.
Trump wasn't found innocent, the decision clearly states that there is no question about fraud. They threw it out because the fines asked for damages the judge felt was too high.
They can appeal for a lower amount of damages and have the confirmation once again that Trump and company were guilty of fraud for lying over valuing properties.
And it's not over yet. James has said she will take it up to the New York Court of Appeals (which is the Supreme Court in New York). The final word has not yet been written.
"Judge David Friedman gave Engoron a close-up that would have made Swanson wince. He detailed how the underlying law "has never been used in the way it is being used in this case – namely, to attack successful, private, commercial transactions, negotiated at arm’s length between highly sophisticated parties fully capable of monitoring and defending their own interests. He accused Engoron of participating in an effort clearly directed by James at "ending with the derailment of President Trump’s political career and the destruction of his real estate business."
Judge who fined Trump $500 million gets the books thrown at him
Future generations will look back and wonder how the law could have been used in such a way. They should only get to see the commentary on this site.
Moments ago, the FBI raided John Bolton's home.
I’m sure many here will join you in wishing her a hap hap happy birthday.
Oh yeah!
ICE is coming to Boston:
For some reason this photo form San Diego has caused interest on X: