Donald Trump’s endeavor to obtain a $464 million appeal bond in a civil fraud case has presented intricate legal and financial hurdles. The case centers on a verdict against Trump, his sons, and his company for inflating their net worth to obtain more favorable loan terms. Last week, the judgment was officially entered, setting a 30-day period for Trump to post a bond to halt any collection efforts by New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office.
Initially, Trump’s legal team sought an emergency stay on enforcing the $464 million judgment, citing the impossibility of Trump posting the full amount due to constraints outlined by Judge Arthur Engoron.
They argued that the excessive and punitive nature of the judgment, combined with an alleged unlawful and unconstitutional prohibition on lending transactions, rendered it unfeasible to secure and post the entire bond. Instead, they proposed a $100 million bond, asserting that without a reduction, they might be compelled to post a bond exceeding the judgment amount, factoring in post-judgment interest and appeal expenses.
Trump unable to get $464M appeal bond to stop collection, attorneys say: 'Practical impossibility' https://t.co/pmTRz9tbT5
— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 18, 2024
However, a New York appeals court judge rejected Trump’s plea to post a $100 million bond instead of the mandated full amount. Justice Anil C. Singh denied the reduction but granted other requests, such as allowing continued borrowing. This ruling is provisional until a full panel of appeals court judges weighs in, leaving room for the entire court to act before Trump must file the bond.
The New York Attorney General’s office contended that Trump and his co-defendants must post a bond covering the entire $464 million judgment to prevent evasion or difficulty in enforcement. They argued that without a full bond, Trump might evade penalties or hinder enforcement after an appeal.
Moreover, the AG’s filing suggested that Trump’s appeal of Judge Engoron’s ruling would likely falter due to the alleged “brazen fraud” perpetrated by the defendants. Despite Trump’s denial of wrongdoing and his appeal of Engoron’s ruling, the AG’s office pointed out inconsistencies in Trump’s claims about his wealth and his need to sell properties to settle the judgment.
In essence, Trump confronts significant legal and financial obstacles in securing the $464 million appeal bond for the civil fraud case. His request for a reduced bond was denied, and the New York Attorney General’s office insists on the necessity of a full bond to ensure enforcement. This situation underscores the complexities and potential impediments encountered by defendants in high-profile legal cases when securing substantial bonds.
