On Wednesday, attorneys for President Donald Trump submitted a brief to the New York Court of Appeals asking the court to vacate the liability finding in a $464 million civil fraud case that centered on the former president’s real‑estate valuations. The filing asserts that the judgment should be thrown out because the case was improperly brought and driven by political animus.
Legal arguments presented
The appeal contends that New York Attorney General Letitia James lacked authority to pursue the case, noting that the dispute involved private commercial transactions rather than any direct harm to the public. It further argues that Trump’s property valuations were subjective estimates that lenders independently evaluated, not fraudulent misrepresentations.
According to the brief, the only “victims” are a handful of sophisticated banks and insurers that never claimed injury, were eager to do business with President Trump and his family, and actually profited by more than $100 million from the transactions. The document also challenges the premise that real‑estate values are objective, warning that the Attorney General’s broad theory could allow New York officials to second‑guess any business deal on imagined grounds.
Constitutional and punitive concerns
The filing labels the $450 million disgorgement award as excessive, unlawful, and even unconstitutional. It also points to the politically charged nature of the case, arguing that the Attorney General’s repeated public statements—calling President Trump a “criminal,” promising to investigate his business dealings, and threatening his family—demonstrate bias that should have halted the case.
President Trump’s team emphasizes that the judgment, rendered in 2023, required him to pay $355 million plus interest, barred him from serving as an officer or director of any New York company for two years, and prohibited loan applications from New York banks for three years. While an intermediate appeals court later vacated the monetary award, the underlying liability finding and the associated restrictions remain in place, prompting the current appeal.
Background of the lawsuit
In 2022, Attorney General Letitia James sued Trump, alleging 200 instances of fraud. Her office claimed the former president routinely overvalued New York City properties to secure favorable loans and insurance rates, violating New York Executive Law § 63(12), which authorizes the Attorney General to prosecute repeated fraudulent or illegal acts. The law defines fraud as any scheme or device to defraud, including deception, misrepresentation, concealment, false pretense, or unconscionable contractual provision.
After a trial in 2023, a New York judge found Trump liable and imposed the penalties described above. The Trump administration has repeatedly characterized the lawsuit as “lawfare”—a politically motivated use of the legal system to harass the president and his family.
Next steps
The Court of Appeals will review the brief and decide whether to uphold the liability finding or overturn it entirely. If the court sides with President Trump, the remaining restrictions on his business activities in New York could be lifted, and the case would set a precedent for how state attorneys general may pursue civil fraud actions against high‑profile individuals.
The filing underscores the administration’s broader effort to push back against what it views as partisan attacks on the president and his family, framing the legal battle as a defense of constitutional rights and fair business practices.
Original reporting: Fox News (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
