Trump appeals NY fraud ruling despite hailing earlier decision as 'victory'

By Erik Larson and Patricia Hurtado

 

President Donald Trump is challenging a New York appeals court decision holding him liable for fraud in a state lawsuit over his asset valuations, seeking to fully clear his name after his nearly half-billion dollar penalty in the case was tossed out.

 

Trump’s notice of appeal was filed Tuesday with New York’s Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, which will now review the case. New York Attorney General Letitia James, who won her trial court case against Trump but saw the penalty against him wiped out, has also said she’ll appeal. James’ office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment after Trump filed his notice.

 

 

Trump is challenging the Aug. 21 decision by an intermediate appeals court in Manhattan even after saying within minutes of the ruling that it was a “total victory.”  

 

The intermediate court vacated the $464 million penalty but still found Trump liable for fraud and left in place other sanctions that were part of the verdict in the landmark case. That includes a temporary ban on Trump and two of his sons serving as corporate officers in New York.

 

James, a Democrat, sued Trump and his sprawling real estate company in September 2022, more than two years before his successful bid to retake the White House. She won after an 11-week trial in which she presented evidence that Trump for years regularly inflated the value of assets, including Mar-a-Lago and his Trump Tower penthouse, to get better terms on loans. The alleged conduct saved Trump millions of dollars in lower interest rates, which the state sought to claw back.

 

The ruling from a five-judge panel of appeals court judges was widely seen as a win for Trump, knocking out one of the main legal liabilities remaining against him and his company. But the lengthy opinion, which came nearly a year after oral arguments, was filled with findings that could give solace to both Trump and James. 

 

The deeply divided panel issued three competing opinions, none of which got a majority. The judges agreed unanimously that the fine against Trump was “excessive,” and struck it down. But they split on whether he should be held liable for fraud which led to a compromise in which four judges affirmed liability even though only two of them actually agreed with that outcome.

 

Crucially, the decision affirmed that James’ investigation was proper under New York law, a major point of contention as the US Justice Department under Trump probes whether the attorney general violated his rights by suing him.

 

The US Supreme Court could ultimately be asked to have the final say.