Fogbow

Posted: **Thu Feb 22, 2024 11:40 pm**

Donald Trump's attorneys were required to submit a proposed order for Judge Engoron to sign that conformed to his verdict and judgment in the case.

As discussed above, Trump's lawyers weren't required to do anything with respect to the judgment. Their participation was not requested or required.

They did have the right to stick their oar in, if they did it fast enough, but any changes they requested would have to be consistent with the judge's order and the trial record.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:04 am**

Raffi Melkonian, a good guy and an extremely smart and experienced appeals lawyer, has gone into the weeds with his machete and is clearing away a lot of nonsense that reputable legal journalists and commentators should have known better than to spread. It's worthwhile to read the entire thread, not just the posts I've quoted.

Raffi Melkonian
@RMFifthCircuit
Again, I do not understand why people are having such trouble getting this, but it is absolutely not true that Trump has to pay the judgment or bond the judgment or do anything to the judgment to appeal.

Yes, it is likely going to be very hard for Trump to bond $450,000,000, I agree. But he can still appeal.

All an appellate bond does is prevent the plaintiff from executing on the judgment during the appeal. That's it. It has nothing to do with whether you are allowed to appeal.

It would totally delight me if the claim in the article is true. There is no ill that I don't wish Trump. None. But it's just not true.

Also, just incidentally, a system where you have to pay in order to appeal would be bananas. Forget about Trump. There are millions of non-Trump appellants.

To fix all these articles, all the journalists have to write is "Trump can appeal, but to prevent enforcement during his appeal he has to get a stay, which usually requires a bond."

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:22 am**

chancery wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 11:20 pm
I'm still shaking my head at the failure of Trump's lawyers to state their concerns about the judgment and explain the kinds of relief they might want with respect to the NYAG's collection efforts.

This situation was completely predictable months ago. (Actually years ago: almost all of the significant factual evidence relied on by the judge was in the can by the time discovery closed.) Certainly immediately after Justice Engoron issued the partial summary judgement order in late September, Trump's lawyers should have engaged bankruptcy counsel and an investment banker to figure out a plan and have it ready to go weeks ago.

So I guess one possible explanation for the fumbling behavior of Trump's lawyers since the issuance of the final decision and order is that Trump has in fact engaged new counsel, including appellate specialists and bankruptcy/reorganization counsel (and an investment bank), but only did so at the last minute, and trial counsel have been ordered to seek delay but otherwise keep their big mouths shut with respect to any substantive issue while the new team struggles to understand just how fucked up Trump's position is and what they might be able to do about it.

Pathetic.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:53 am**

I wonder if the six listed businesses that had their NY addresses changed to FL are the ones he likes the best. Just thinking about why they tried to slip those particular ones in.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 1:27 am**

Although I haven't really paid attention to the voluminous evidence in the record as to the tangled structure of Trump's empire of grift, I think that the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust sits at or near the top of the pyramid. The others, I suppose, might have or control title to substantial assets, directly or indirectly.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 6:34 am**

If those companies are under control of the T Trust, wouldn't the court appointed monitor need to be informed and approve of a major change in the structure of the assets? Another tub of boiling water oil awaiting the former guy?

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 10:10 am**

chancery wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 1:27 am Although I haven't really paid attention to the voluminous evidence in the record as to the tangled structure of Trump's empire of grift, I think that the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust sits at or near the top of the pyramid. The others, I suppose, might have or control title to substantial assets, directly or indirectly.

After a little reading I see that these are called supersedeas bonds. I have questions. Does NY state cap the maximum amount on the required? In Florida it is $50 million I believe? Also, what is the premium typically? Trump would have to put up a boat load of assets to secure a bond. I think it has to cover the judgement amount plus potential legal fees and such.

So the alternative is to appeal and then simultaneously to the appeal AG James would begin proceedings to collect. I assume Trump's attorneys can file crap at every move on that too?

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:03 am**

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 10:10 am I assume Trump's attorneys can file crap at every move on that too?

C'mon RC! As bob and chancery continually emphasize, accuracy-minded folk that they are

, anybody can file anything anywhere anytime! The point is whether the crap achieves its desired effect in any way.

See, even we-non-lawyahs learn.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:14 am**

As all y'all's know, I read a lot of court docs (for fun; IANAL), and listen to a lot of lawyerly podcasts about fuckhead's legal cases.

So I'm hear to tell y'all, I have now heard 83 different versions on whether or not and how and when fuckhead will have to pay up on this judgement, and if or if not the inevitable appeal will postpone the requirement to pay up, for who knows how long.

We have reached judicial overload. I've stopped listening to anything on this subject. Even Andrew Weissman

.

Indeed, I'm getting sick of the talking heads, even my faves. There is so much "talking to hear yourself talk" going on. Even I can tell that half of what they say is not correct.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:29 am**

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 10:10 am After a little reading I see that these are called supersedeas bonds. I have questions. Does NY state cap the maximum amount on the required? In Florida it is $50 million I believe? Also, what is the premium typically? Trump would have to put up a boat load of assets to secure a bond. I think it has to cover the judgement amount plus potential legal fees and such.

I'm not aware of a cap in New York and Raffi confirms this impression. He is, as I've said, an expert in appellate practice. He lives in Houston and is a member of a Houston firm, but he's also admitted in New York and has extensive experience with New York appeals.

https://twitter.com/RMFifthCircuit/stat ... 2950548713

Michael A. Hiener
@MichaelAHiener

A supersedeas bond in Ohio can be no more than $50 million.

Raffi Melkonian
@RMFifthCircuit
Yes. Texas has a cap too. But New York doesn't.

Reality Check wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 10:10 am So the alternative is to appeal and then simultaneously to the appeal AG James would begin proceedings to collect. I assume Trump's attorneys can file crap at every move on that too?

Sure. Judgment enforcement is usually tedious and slow -- although the State of New York may have some sovereign prerogatives and priorities that would help here. But where there are third parties with separate claims to an asset -- which is sure to be the case with Trump's real estate holdings -- you need to have a proceeding to sort out the hierarchy of priorities and determine who gets what. The time-table for such proceedings could easily stretch over several years.

Raffi suggested off the top of his head that the NYAG might get hold of about $50 million -- presumably cash from bank accounts and other very liquid assets -- without much trouble, but that collecting more than $50 million would likely be a grind.

But the ability of Trump's lawyers to gum up enforcement proceedings doesn't help with Trump's biggest risk, which is the possibility that the commencement of enforcement against a single major real estate holding could set off a cascading chain of defaults for all of his major holdings. That wouldn't necessarily facilitate the NYAG's enforcement efforts, and in fact, probably the opposite, but it would be very, very bad for Trump.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:48 am**

p0rtia wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:14 am So I'm hear to tell y'all, I have now heard 83 different versions on whether or not and how and when fuckhead will have to pay up on this judgement, and if or if not the inevitable appeal will postpone the requirement to pay up, for who knows how long.

It's really very simple.

The appeal and the requirement to pay up are completely separate.

(i) Trump has an unqualified right to file an appeal, whether or not he's paid the judgment, and whether or not he's put up a bond.

(ii) Filing the appeal has no effect on the collectibility of the judgment. The only thing that can pause the NYAG's collection efforts is (i) the posting of a supersedeas bond or (ii) payment in full. (If Trump pays in full and then wins a reversal or a reduction of the judgment, the state will have to pay money back to Trump.)

(iii) Obtaining a superseadeas bond, which is provided by an insurance or bonding company, requires (a) paying the premium, some percent of the total amount, and (b) providing liquid collateral, cash or cash equivalents, sufficient to cover not only the entire judgment but also some period of the interest. I have no idea what the premium might be, but the big problem is the collateral. No ordinary insurance or bonding company will take on this risk without full liquid collateral.

I suppose there might be companies specializing in unusual risks that would accept non-liquid collateral, e.g., unencumbered real estate, jewelry collections, and so on. I'm pretty sure, however, that such companies would require that the total value of the collateral be several times the amount of the judgment, and that the premiums, payable in full up front, would be so high that it wouldn't be worth the trouble

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:09 pm**

Thanks for the information chancery. This is what is so great about the Fogbow. We can get better information here than about anywhere.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:31 pm**

Agreed. I appreciate that the IAALs explain it to us IANALs in ways we can understand.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:48 pm**

So I got curious about the $25 million that was paid in the trump university suit - where did he get that money??? Wiki has a long and very interesting page about it, but the tl;dr is that trump didn't pay any money at all! It was paid by the guy who owns Circus Circus and Treasure Island, a guy named Phil Ruffin. He gave trump $28 million, saying it had to do with their mutual business in Vegas. Whatever.

The story is really very interesting - there were actually 3 suits - 2 federal class actions and 1 NY (Eric Schneiderman!). Lots of familiar names in this tale (except, to me the name of the Ruffin character who actually paid the settlement). I guess since no money left his pocket that's why we never hear the shithead groaning about it.

There were cases in Texas and FL, but lo and damn behold, they were dropped. The folks who dropped them surprisingly (not) also got campaign donations from trump. Some names you may know: Pam Bondi, Greg Abbot, Ken Paxton. A juicy excerpt:

In 2010, the office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott investigated Trump University. No suit was brought, but after exchanging communications with investigators that included requests from the investigators for customer lists and internal documents, Trump University closed its operations in Texas. These had included newspaper advertising, free presentations, and three-day seminars.[86] Six years later, during the 2016 presidential election, the Associated Press found that Trump had donated $35,000 Abbott's successful campaign for governor in 2014.[87] Texas Monthly questioned whether Abbott had treated Trump with especial favor.[88] Ken Paxton, who succeeded Abbott as Texas Attorney General, sent a cease and desist letter to former Deputy Chief of Consumer Protection John Owens, who said he had been told to drop the case and had forwarded previously undisclosed documents to the Associated Press. Paxton said in a statement that Owens had released "confidential and privileged information".[89] David S. Morales, the Deputy Attorney General in 2010, admitted in 2016 that he had quashed the $5.4 million suit without discussing the issue with Abbott.[90] In 2018, Trump nominated Morales to serve as a judge at the District Court for the Southern District of Texas.[91]

The office of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi announced in September 2013 that it was considering joining a New York lawsuit against Trump University.[92][93] Four days later, the Donald J. Trump Foundation donated $25,000 to "And Justice for All", a 527 group supporting Bondi's reelection campaign. After that, Bondi declined to join New York. According to a Bondi spokesman, Bondi had personally solicited the donation from Trump several weeks before her office announced it was considering joining the lawsuit.[93][94][95] In March 2016, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a complaint with the IRS about the potentially illegal donation.[96][97] In September 2016, it was reported that the donation violated laws against political contributions from nonprofit organizations, and that Trump had reimbursed the foundation with his own money and paid the IRS a $2,500 excise tax as a penalty.[98] Trump denied the donation was connected to the Trump University lawsuit, saying it was for Bondi's performance as Attorney General.[99] The White House announced in November 2019 that Bondi would join its staff temporarily for handling communications about the ongoing impeachment inquiry against Trump, prompting objection from ethics watchdogs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 4:17 pm**

@kylegriffin1
BREAKING on @MSNBC:

The New York County clerk has just entered the judgment signed by Justice Engoron — the total disgorgement (and interest) for Donald Trump is $454,156,783.05.

ETA: Interest added at $111k per day starting today.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:01 pm**

That's it. That's the tweet.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:02 pm**

I wonder if they rounded up the 5 cents from 4 cents

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:15 pm**

chancery wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:48 amFiling the appeal has no effect on the collectibility of the judgment. The only thing that can pause the NYAG's collection efforts is (i) the posting of a supersedeas bond or (ii) payment in full.

Because this is 'Merika, and anybody can file anything, I assume one could ask the appellate court to modify, etc., the bond amount (and other collateral requirements). Or ask for some sort of stay from the appellate court.

Not that those asks would be successful. Nor would there be a stay pending the ask. But that they are in theory possible, and would divert attention away from the appeal (and possibly enforcement, if there's no bond).

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:25 pm**

But that they are in theory possible - like Orly Taitz taking the appeal for the former guy and get the fines doubled

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:44 pm**

Is it correct that the clock starts ticking and that if Trump does not manage to stay collection of the judgement, the State of New York can start seizing his assets 30 days from today?

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 6:30 pm**

bob wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:15 pm
chancery wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 11:48 amFiling the appeal has no effect on the collectibility of the judgment. The only thing that can pause the NYAG's collection efforts is (i) the posting of a supersedeas bond or (ii) payment in full.
Because this is 'Merika, and anybody can file anything, I assume one could ask the appellate court to modify, etc., the bond amount (and other collateral requirements). Or ask for some sort of stay from the appellate court.

Not that those asks would be successful. Nor would there be a stay pending the ask. But that they are in theory possible, and would divert attention away from the appeal (and possibly enforcement, if there's no bond).

Sheesh, I was trying to keep things simple in response to the question.

Yes of course, Trump can seek a discretionary stay of enforcement either from Judge Engoron or from the First Department, as I discussed upthread.

The statutory authority is CPLR 5519(c), not one of the CPLR's most clearly-written sections. I'm not familiar with the caselaw, and I've seen an indication that there isn't much.

But somehow, on the basis of nothing in particular, I don't think that a request by Trump for such a stay is likely to be successful. I note that Raffi Melkonian
@RMFifthCircuit, who is (unlike me) very experienced with the ins and outs of New York appeals, has said the same thing, somewhere in the very long thread I linked to several posts ago.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 7:15 pm**

much ado wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:44 pm Is it correct that the clock starts ticking and that if Trump does not manage to stay collection of the judgement, the State of New York can start seizing his assets 30 days from today?

That's what I'm seeing on the twitter.

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 7:33 pm**

What we need is something like the National Debt Clock, but for dookiepants.

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 7:38 pm**

Flatpoint High wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2024 7:33 pm What we need is something like the National Debt Clock, but for dookiepants.

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 8:00 pm**

I thought someone had already posted this somewhere.

https://trumpdebtcounter.com/

Fogbow

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization