On Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former lawyer and self-described "fixer," Judge Engoron wrote in his ruling that he found the star witness to be a credible witness despite having been convicted of perjury.

"His testimony was significantly compromised by his having pleaded guilty to perjury and by some seeming contradictions in what he said at trial," Engoron wrote. "However, carefully parsed, he testified that although Donald Trump did not expressly direct him to reverse engineer financial statements, he ordered him to do so indirectly, in his 'mob voice.'"

Engoron continued that although the "animosity between the witness and the defendant is palpable, providing Cohen with an incentive to lie, the Court found his testimony credible, based on the relaxed manner in which he testified, the general plausibility of his statements, and, most importantly, the way his testimony was corroborated by other trial evidence."

A "less-forgiving factfinder" might have come to a different conclusion and not believed "a single word of a convicted perjurer," Engoron wrote.

"This factfinder does not believe that pleading guilty to perjury means that you can never tell the truth," he continued. "Michael Cohen told the truth."

Cohen, who pleaded guilty in 2018 to lying to Congress about the Russia probe, addressed the passage on social media, writing on X, "Judge Engoron's determination regarding my veracity at the NYAG Trump civil fraud trial. Michael Cohen told the truth!"

Members of the Trump family and their attorneys roundly called the ruling unjust and indicated they plan to appeal.

Eric Trump told ABC News the judgment against him and his family is "a total joke" and "insane." He said the family will immediately appeal the ruling, which he said shows the court and the attorney general in his opinion are "living in an alternate universe."

Donald Trump Jr. accused the case of being politically motivated.

"We've reached the point where your political beliefs combined with what venue your case is heard are the primary determinants of the outcome; not the facts of the case!" he said in a statement to ABC News.

Donald Trump's lawyer, Chris Kise, also claimed the case was an "unjust political crusade" against the leading Republican presidential candidate and that there was no evidence of fraud.

"Hard to imagine a more unfair process and hard to believe this is happening in America," Kise said, adding that the former president "will of course appeal."

Donald Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, called the verdict a "manifest injustice" and the "culmination of a multi-year, politically fueled witch hunt."

"Countless hours of testimony proved that there was no wrongdoing, no crime, and no victim," Habba said in a statement. "Given the grave stakes, we trust that the Appellate Division will overturn this egregious verdict and end this relentless persecution against my clients."

The Trump Organization also said the ruling was a "gross miscarriage of justice."

"Every member of the New York business community, no matter the industry, should be gravely concerned with this gross overreach and brazen attempt by the Attorney General to exert limitless power where no private or public harm has been established," a spokesperson said in a statement. "If allowed to stand, this ruling will only further expedite the continuing exodus of companies from New York."

Judge Engoron took direct aim at several of the Trumps' core defenses, including Trump's claim that real estate appraisal is imprecise and subjective, and that property valuations reflect nuances in the market that only sophisticated practitioners can understand.

Engoron called that argument a "great red herring in this case."

"True enough, as appraising is an art as well as a science," Engoron wrote. "However, the science part cannot be fraudulent. When two appraisals rely on starkly different assumptions, that is not evidence of a difference of opinion, that is evidence of deceit."

Engoron also undercut a common refrain from defendants' that their accountants were responsible for maintaining above-board business practices.

In a section of his ruling titled, "Blame the Accountants," Engoron wrote that, "There is overwhelming evidence … that the buck for being truthful in the supporting data valuations stopped with the Trump Organization, not the accountants."

Doug Larson's name appears across five years of Donald Trump's financial documents, according to records entered into evidence.

A longtime professional appraiser with the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield, Larson was cited in Trump Organization documents as an expert at valuing properties like 40 Wall Street, Trump Tower, and an adjoining retail space called "Niketown." Spreadsheets entered as evidence explicitly reference multiple phone calls with Larson between 2013 and 2017.

When asked about these phone calls in court, Larson testified that no such conversations occurred.

"Is it fair to say that Mr. Trump valued Trump Tower at $526 million in conjunction with you?" state attorney Mark Ladov asked Larson.

"No, that is incorrect," Larson said.

"Were you aware that Mr. McConney was citing you as a valuation source in his work papers?" Ladov asked.

"No, I was not," replied Larson, who said he did not assist Trump Organization executives in valuing Trump Tower, Niketown, or 40 Wall Street, despite Trump's paperwork referencing him as a source.

Evidence presented by the state instead suggested that the valuations were determined using cherry-picked metrics from a generic email Larson sent clients.

"It's a way to get your name out to clients for potential work," Larson said about one such "email blast" that was used in a Trump Tower valuation.

Larson added that the valuations Trump Organization executives determined based on "consultation" with him used flawed methodologies, such as using capitalization rates related to office buildings to appraise the retail Niketown building.

"It doesn't make sense," Larson said about Niketown's $287 million valuation.

"It's inappropriate and inaccurate," Larson said about the Trump Organization relying on his name to support their valuations. "I should have been told, and appraisals should have been ordered."