Trump appeals New York civil fraud judgment that threatens his business

NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s lawyers urged an appeals court Monday to overturn the nearly half-billion dollar civil fraud judgment against the former president, calling it an “unauthorized, unprecedented power-grab” by New York Attorney General Tish James.

The $454 million judgment remains a significant threat to the financial health of the Republican presidential nominee, even as a panel of state appeals judges has allowed him to hold off on turning over the full amount while he appeals the verdict.

The financial penalty imposed on Trump and the other defendants — including his adult sons, Don Jr. and Eric, along with several business associates — came after Justice Arthur Engoron found in February that the former president and his company committed fraud by falsely inflating his net worth to obtain favorable rates from banks and insurers.

In the appeal, Trump’s lawyers described Engoron’s decision as “erroneous” and claimed the judge “struggled to understand basic banking concepts.” They argued Engoron incorrectly rejected an appeals court decision regarding the statute of limitations.

They also touted Trump’s real estate acumen, as they did during the three-month trial that ended in January. “President Trump stands among the most visionary and iconic real estate developers in American history,” they wrote.

They argued that no banks or insurers were harmed by any of the transactions, saying that the companies made significant profits. “They raved internally about their business with him and were eager for more,” his lawyers wrote.

A spokeswoman for James’s office said Trump’s lawyers were rehashing old arguments. “We won this case based on the facts and the law, and we are confident we will prevail on appeal.”

Even among Trump’s numerous legal headaches, most notably a criminal conviction, the civil fraud verdict poses a unique threat, since Trump has said in court filings that he lacks the cash to satisfy the judgment.

The appeals court has scheduled oral arguments in the case for early September, and it isn’t clear if the court would rule on the appeal before the November election.