Trump New York fraud bond cut to $175 million in appeal from $454 million

Former
President
Donald
Trump
speaks
during
a
press
conference
at
40
Wall
Street
on
March
25,
2024
in
New
York
City. 

Michael
M.
Santiago
|
Getty
Images

A

New
York
appeals
court

on
Monday
paused
for
10
days
a
massive
civil
business

fraud
judgment

against

Donald
Trump


and
sharply
reduced
to
$175
million
the

bond

amount
he
will
have
to
post
to
obtain
a
longer
stay
of
that
award.

The
ruling
came
the
same
day
New
York
Attorney
General
Letitia
James
could
start
seizing
the
former

president
‘s
real
estate
assets
and
bank
accounts
to
satisfy
a
$454
million
and
rising
judgment
after
he
failed
to
obtain
an
appeal
bond.

James
is
prevented
from
doing
so

for
now

due
to
the
order
from
the
five-judge
panel
in
Manhattan
Supreme
Court’s
appellate
division,
which
did
not
give
a
reason
for
cutting
the
bond
threshold
by
about
60%.

“We’ll
post
whatever
is
necessary,
whether
it
be
cash
or
security
or
bonds”
Trump
told
reporters
after
leaving
a
hearing
in
the
same
court,
where
his
trial
on
criminal
business
records
charges
related
to
a
hush
money
payment
to
a
porn
star
was
set
for
April
15.

Earlier
Monday,
he
had
raged
in
a
Truth
Social
post
that
he
might
be
forced
to
sell
his “babies”

real
estate
assets

to
satisfy
the
judgment
while
he
appeals
a
judge’s
verdict
that
he
and
other
defendants
for
years
fraudulently
inflated
the
stated
value
of
properties
while
obtaining
loans.

Trump’s
lawyers
previously
asked
that
the
appeal
bond
in
the
case
be
set
at
$100
million.

In
a
court
filing
last
week,
those
attorneys
said
it
was “impossible”
for
Trump
to
get
an
appeal
bond
for
$454
million
after
having
approached
more
than
30
surety
companies
without
success.
Trump’s
two
adults
sons,
his
company
the
Trump
Organization
and
two
executives
who
all
were
co-defendants
in
the
case
owe
a
total
of
about
$10
million
in
additional
damages.

None
of
the
surety
companies
were
willing
to
write
a
$464
million
bond
without
Trump
posting
cash
or
some
other
liquid
asset,
the
attorneys
wrote
in
their
filing
with
the
appellate
division.

Because
of
the
size
of
the
fraud
judgment,
the
companies
insisted
that
Trump
show “cash
reserves
approaching
$1
billion,”
according
to
his
lawyers.
But
neither
Trump
nor
the
Trump
Organization
company
has
that
amount
of
cash
on
hand,
the
filing
said.

While
Monday’s
appeals
court
ruling
lowers
the
size
of
the
required
appeal
bond,
it
does
not
reduce
the
size
of
the
judgment
in
the
case,
which
resulted
from
a
lawsuit
filed
by
James.

If
Trump
and
the
other
defendants
lose
their
appeal,
they
would
be
on
the
hook
for
the
full
judgment,
unless
the
appeals
court
cuts
it.

“The
ruling
today
represents
a
great
first
step
towards
the
ultimate
reversal
of
a
baseless
and
reckless
judgment,”
said
Trump’s
lawyer,
Charles
Kise,
in
a
statement.

“The
[appellate
division]
no
doubt
recognized
the
rule
of
law
must
triumph
over
the
political
agenda
of
the
Attorney
General,”
Kise
said. “President
Trump
looks
forward
to
a
full
and
fair
appellate
process
which
overturns
the
judgment
and
ends
the
Attorney
General’s
abuse
of
power
and
tyrannical
pursuit
of
the
front
running
candidate
for
President
of
the
United
States.”

A
spokesperson
for
James
said, “Donald
Trump
is
still
facing
accountability
for
his
staggering
fraud.”

“The
court
has
already
found
that
he
engaged
in
years
of
fraud
to
falsely
inflate
his
net
worth
and
unjustly
enrich
himself,
his
family,
and
his
organization,’
James’
spokesperson
said.

“The
$464
million
judgment

plus
interest

against
Donald
Trump
and
the
other
defendants
still
stands.”

In
its
order
Monday,
the
appeals
court
also
stayed
trial
Judge
Arthur
Engoron’s
decision
that
had
barred
Trump
from
serving
as
an
officer
or
director
of
a
New
York
company
for
three
years,
and
that
had
barred
him
and
the
corporate
defendants
from
applying
for
loans
from
New
York
lenders
for
the
same
period.

The
order
also
stayed
Engoron’s
ruling
that
had
barred
Trump’s
sons,
Donald
Trump
Jr.
and
Eric
Trump,
from
serving
as
officers
and
directors
of
New
York
companies
for
two
years.

But
the
appeals
court
panel
rejected
a
request
to
block
enforcement
of
Engoron’s
order
extending
and
enhancing
the
role
of
a
financial
watchdog
the
judge
had
installed
to
monitor
the
Trump
Organization’s
finances.
The
panel
also
allowed
to
stand
Engoron’s
order
installing
an
independent
director
of
compliance
at
Trump’s
company.

Read
more
CNBC
politics
coverage

Engoron,
who
conducted
a
bench
trial
for
the
suit,
in
February
ruled
against
the
Trump
defendants,
saying
they
had
submitted “blatantly
false
financial
data”
to
boost
Trump’s
financial
statements
and
obtain
better
terms
on
loans.

Trump
has
condemned
the
verdict,
the
judge
and
James,
saying
he
is
the
victim
of
a
politically
motivated
attack
designed
to
harm
his
chances
of
defeating
President

Joe
Biden

in
November’s
election.

More
than
a
week
ago,
Trump
obtained
a
$91.6
million
appeal
bond
from
a
subsidiary
of
the
Chubb
insurance
company
to
secure
a
Manhattan
federal
civil
court
defamation
judgment
against
him
in
favor
of
E.
Jean
Carroll,
a
writer
who
had
accused
him
of
rape.

That
bond,
which
was
collateralized
by
a
brokerage
account
of
Trump’s,
will
keep
Carroll
from
collecting
on
a
judgment
of
more
than
$83
million
from
Trump
while
his
appeal
is
pending.

Chubb
had
discussed
issuing
Trump
a
second
bond,
for
his
fraud
case,
and
initially
was
willing
to
consider
a
mix
of
liquid
assets
and
real
property
as
collateral,
according
to
Alan
Garten,
an
attorney
for
the
Trump
Organization.

But
Chubb
backed
out
of
those
talks
last
week,
Garten
said
in
the
court
filing
Monday.
Chubb’s
exit
came
after
it
was
publicly
revealed
that
Trump
obtained
his
bond
in
Carroll’s
case
from
the
company.

Chubb
CEO
Evan
Greenberg
last
week
wrote
a
letter
to
investors,
customers
and
brokers
who
had
raised
concerns
about
the
Carroll-related
bond.

“When
Chubb
issues
an
appeal
bond,
it
isn’t
making
judgments
about
the
claims,
even
when
the
claims
involve
alleged
reprehensible
conduct,”
Greenberg
wrote.

“As
the
surety,
we
don’t
take
sides,”
he
said.

“It
would
be
wrong
for
us
to
do
so
and
we
are
in
no
way
supporting
the
defendant.
We
are
supporting
and
are
part
of
the
justice
system
plumbing
included
in
this
case.”



CNBC’s
Kevin
Breuninger
contributed
to
this
article.

Don’t
miss
these
stories
from
CNBC
PRO:

Comments are closed.