NEW YORK — Fresh off victories in other legal cases, Donald Trump on Monday pressed a New York appeals court to overturn the nearly $500 million New York civil fraud judgment that threatens to drain his personal cash reserves as he campaigns to retake the White House.
In paperwork filed with the state’s mid-level appeals court, the former president’s lawyers said Manhattan Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 16 finding that Trump lied to banks, insurers and others about his wealth was “erroneous” and “egregious.”
Trump’s appeal arguments echoed many of the gripes he delivered during his trial to TV cameras outside the courtroom.
His lawyers argued that New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit should have been promptly dismissed, the statute of limitations barred some allegations, that no one was harmed by Trump’s alleged fraud and that James’ involvement in private business transactions threatens to drive business out of the state.
Trump’s lawyers contend that Engoron’s decision, if upheld, would bestow James, a Democrat, with “limitless power to target anyone she desires, including her self-described political opponents,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in a 116-page filing with the Appellate Division of the state’s trial court.
Engoron rejected many of the same objections as the case proceeded to trial last year, at one point equating them to the plot of the film “Groundhog Day” and fining some of Trump’s lawyers $7,500 each for “repetitive, frivolous” argument.
Trump posted a $175 million bond in April to halt collection of the judgment and prevent James’ office from seizing his assets while he appeals. If he wins, he won’t have to pay the state anything and will get back the money he has put up now.
“Such an outrageous miscarriage of justice is profoundly un-American, and a complete reversal is the only means available to restore public confidence in the integrity of the New York judicial system,” Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said in a statement. He called Engoron’s decisions “legally bereft” and “untethered to the law or to commercial reality,” and described the staggering judgment as “draconian, unlawful, and unconstitutional.”
The Appellate Division has said it will hear oral arguments in late September. Trump’s lawyers initiated the appeal days after Engoron’s ruling and had until Monday to file written arguments.
James’ office said Trump and his lawyers are raising unfounded arguments.
“We won this case based on the facts and the law, and we are confident we will prevail on appeal,” James’ office said in a statement.
Monday’s appeal filing is the latest development in a momentous legal and political stretch for Trump, who last week accepted the Republican party’s presidential nomination just days after he was hurt in a shooting at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. An attendee was killed and two others were hurt.
On July 1, the Supreme Court sided with Trump in ruling that ex-presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts performed while in office, further delaying his Washington, D.C., election interference case and causing his sentencing in his New York hush money criminal case to be delayed until Sept. 18 while his lawyers fight to have that conviction thrown out.
On July 15, a federal judge in Florida dismissed Trump’s classified documents case, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who filed the charges, was illegally appointed by the Justice Department. Smith is appealing.
In the civil fraud case, Engoron found that Trump, his company and top executives — including his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. — schemed for years to inflate his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals.
In addition to the hefty monetary penalty, the judge put strict limitations on the ability of Trump’s company to do business. Among other consequences, Engoron put the Trump Organization under the supervision of a court-appointed monitor for at least three years.
Trump’s appeal ensures that the legal fight over Trump’s business practices will persist into the fall and beyond.
If upheld, Engoron’s ruling will force Trump to give up a sizable chunk of his fortune. The judge ordered Trump to pay $355 million in penalties, but with interest the total has grown to more than $470 million — including $16.8 million that has accrued since the verdict. The sum will increase by nearly $112,000 per day until he pays, unless the verdict is overturned.
Trump maintains that he is worth several billion dollars and testified last year that he had about $400 million in cash, in addition to properties and other investments. James, a Democrat, has said that if Trump is unable to pay, she will seek to seize some of his assets.
Trump and his lawyers laid groundwork for their appeal months by objecting frequently to Engoron’s handling of the trial. Trump called Engoron’s decision “election interference” and “weaponization against a political opponent.” He complained he was being punished for “having built a perfect company, great cash, great buildings, great everything.”
During the trial, Trump’s lawyers accused Engoron of “tangible and overwhelming” bias. They’ve also objected to the legal mechanics of James’ lawsuit. Trump contends the law she sued him under is a consumer-protection statute that’s normally used to rein in businesses that rip off customers.
Trump’s lawyers went to the Appellate Division at least 10 times to challenge Engoron’s prior rulings, including during the trial in an unsuccessful bid to reverse a gag order and $15,000 in fines for violations after Trump made a disparaging and false social media post about a key court staffer.
Trump’s lawyers have long argued that some of the allegations are barred by the statute of limitations, contending that Engoron failed to comply with an Appellate Division ruling last year that he narrow the scope of the trial to weed out outdated allegations.
The Appellate Division could either uphold Engoron’s verdict, reduce or modify the penalty or overturn the decision entirely. If Trump is unsuccessful at the Appellate Division, he can ask the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, to consider taking his case.
Originally Published: