Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354 million, says frauds 'shock the conscience'

The former president was found to have defrauded lenders.

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $354.8 million plus approximately $100 million in interest in a civil fraud lawsuit that could alter the personal fortune and real estate empire that helped propel him to the White House. In the decision, Judge Arthur Engoron excoriated Trump, saying the president's credibility was "severely compromised," that the frauds "shock the conscience" and that Trump and his co-defendants showed a "complete lack of contrition and remorse" that he said "borders on pathological."

Engoron also hit Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump with $4 million fines and barred all three from helming New York companies for years. New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump and his adult sons of engaging in a decade-long scheme in which they used "numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation" to inflate Trump's net worth in order get more favorable loan terms. The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has said he will appeal.


Summary of penalties

Donald Trump and his adult sons were hit with millions in fines in the civil fraud trial and barred for years from being officers in New York companies. The judge said the frauds "shock the conscience."

Donald Trump: $354 million fine + approx. $100 million in interest
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
Donald Trump Jr.: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Eric Trump: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg: $1 million fine
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company
Former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney:
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company


0

Defense focusing on value of Mar-a-Lago

Donald Trump's lawyers plan to call two experts, Lawrence Moens and John Shubin, to testify on Trump's valuation of his Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida.

Moens is a well-known real estate broker in Palm Beach, and Shubin is an expert on deeds and land restrictions.

The value of the property has been bitterly contested by Trump's lawyers since the start of the trial, after Judge Arthur Engoron, in his pretrial partial summary judgment determined that Trump overvalued the property by at least 2,300%. When Trump testified in the trial in November, he repeatedly lashed out at Engoron for what he called a "crazy" assessment of the property.

"He said in his statement that Mar-a-Lago is worth $18 million and it's worth 50 times to 100 times more than that, and everybody knows it. And everybody is watching this case. He called me a fraud and he didn't know anything about me," Trump said on the stand.

According to evidence shown at trial, Trump agreed in a 2002 deed to "forever extinguish their right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use." While Trump Organization executives were aware of the limited use of the property, they allegedly valued the property as a residence in Trump's financial statements while treating it as a social club for tax purposes, according to New York Attorney General Letitia James.

In Trump's statements of financial condition, he valued the property between $426 million and $612 million, despite a local tax assessor appraising the market value of the property between $18 and $27 million. Engoron, in his summary judgment ruling, wrote that James had proven that Trump was liable for a false valuation of the property.

Trump has repeatedly argued that Engoron misunderstood the purpose of a tax assessment, going as far as to call Engoron's finding "fraud."

"Are you paying taxes on an $18 million valuation of Mar-a-Lago or $1.5 billion?" state attorney Kevin Wallace asked Trump during his direct examination.

"You know that assessments are totally different from the valuation of property," Trump responded.


Court denies Trump’s effort to expedite gag order appeal

Former President Donald Trump’s request for an expedited grant of leave to appeal the gag orders in his civil fraud trial was denied Monday afternoon.

The gag order is now likely to still be in effect on Monday when Trump takes the witness stand in his own defense.

Trump’s lawyers requested that Judge David Friedman, who initially lifted the gag order, permit them to appeal the final decision that reinstated the gag order to New York’s Court of Appeals.

“You had a decision by a panel of judges. A single judge cannot undo a panel’s decision,” Lauren Holmes, a court attorney, said during a scheduling meeting Monday afternoon at the Appellate Division First Department.

Dennis Fan, a lawyer for the New York Attorney General, also declined to consent to expediting the briefing schedule.

“You just want to let this drag out until the end of the trial,” Trump attorney Christopher Kise said. “That’s what they are doing.”

Trump still has an avenue to appeal the decision to a higher court; however, the effort will take longer than his lawyers would like. Trump’s lawyers now face a deadline of Monday, Dec. 11 to file their papers to the First Department.


Developers have more latitude when valuing properties, expert says

Frederick Chin, a real estate valuation expert, testified that developers often have more latitude to value their properties compared to appraisers.

According to Chin, developers consider the enterprise value of their assets, meaning how different properties managed by the same company – such as Four Seasons or Ritz-Carlton hotels – increase in value as part of a collection of assets.

“The whole is worth more than the sum of its parts,” Judge Arthur Engoron said to summarize Chin’s testimony.

Chin added that developers also consider the long-term plan for how their assets might be impacted by outside circumstances, like the 2008 recession or the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Everyone in this room has a different perspective on what the next day and the future holds,” Chin said, comparing valuing assets to looking into a “crystal ball.”


Trump likely to attend trial Thursday, say sources

Former President Donald Trump will likely attend his civil fraud trial on Thursday, according to sources familiar with the matter. He is not expected to be in attendance on Wednesday when his son Eric testifies.

Trump last attended the trial on Nov. 6 when he testified as the last state witness. In total, the former president has attended the trial for eight of the 39 days the court has been in session.

Trump is scheduled to testify on Monday, Dec. 11, as the last witness in the case.


Trump files 5th motion for directed verdict

Donald Trump's lawyers made their fifth motion for a directed verdict in the former president's fraud trial in a filing late Friday that appears destined to be rejected.

Judge Arthur Engoron all but guaranteed he would deny the request to end the trial when Trump's lawyer Chris Kise announced his plans to file the motion earlier this week.

"There is no way I am going to grant that," Engoron said on Tuesday. "You'd be wasting your time."

Trump's lawyers nevertheless filed their motion late Friday.

"In sum, there was no fraud, there were no victims, there has simply been no harm or actionable misconduct, and the Court must and should follow the law of the case regarding the scope of the claims at issue," Trump's lawyers wrote.

In the filing, Trump's attorneys targeted New York Attorney General Letitia James' request to fine Trump nearly $400 million for ill-gotten gains by arguing that the state failed to demonstrate that Trump and his sons intended to defraud his lenders or that they engaged in a conspiracy to commit fraud.

"Not a single defense witness supported the notion of any alleged conspiracy, and in fact such testimony refuted fully the existence of the same," the lawyers wrote, calling Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen, who testified about the alleged conspiracy, a "demonstrable, perpetual, and serial liar."

They also argued that James failed to prove that any of Trump's alleged misrepresentations would have materially changed the loans he received from his lenders, writing that the alleged misstatements had "no actual significance" to Trump's lenders.

All four of Trump's previous motions for a directed verdict to end the case for lack of evidence have been rejected by Judge Engoron.