Donald J. Trump on Wednesday lost his initial bid for a New York appeals court to pause the more than $450 million judgment he faces in a civil fraud case, a decision that could expose him to financial peril.
Mr. Trump's lawyers had asked the appeals court to allow him to post only a $100 million bond — a promise from an outside company that the judgment eventually will be paid — because securing one for the full amount was "impossible," they said.
A single appellate court judge assigned to consider Mr. Trump's request, Anil Singh, turned him down on Wednesday. Mr. Trump will try again next month with a panel of five appellate court judges, but for now, the former president is still on the hook to post a bond for the full amount of more than $450 million. And any company providing one would probably require him to pledge cash and other collateral that he does not yet have.
If Mr. Trump fails to secure the bond, the New York attorney general's office, which brought the case accusing him of fraudulently inflating his net worth, can collect the $454 million from him. The attorney general, Letitia James, is expected to provide Mr. Trump a 30-day grace period, which will expire on March 25, at which point she could move swiftly to seize Mr. Trump's bank accounts and perhaps take control of his New York properties.
The $454 million judgment was levied by the trial judge in the fraud case, Arthur F. Engoron, who also imposed a range of other punishments on Mr. Trump and his family business. They include a prohibition on obtaining a loan from a New York bank for three years and a ban on running a company in the state during that same period, restrictions that are complicating Mr. Trump's effort to line up a bond.
"The exorbitant and punitive amount of the judgment coupled with an unlawful and unconstitutional blanket prohibition on lending transactions would make it impossible to secure and post a complete bond," Mr. Trump's lawyers wrote to the appeals court.
Justice Singh also paused those punishments on Wednesday, potentially making it easier to obtain a bond for the full amount.
Financial relief might also come from a separate deal: Mr. Trump's stake in Trump Media & Technology Group, his social media company, could be worth up to $4 billion after a long-delayed merger is made final this year, though not in time for Ms. James's March 25 deadline.
In its own filing, Ms. James's office asked the appeals court to deny Mr. Trump's request.
"There is no merit to defendants' contention that a full bond or deposit is unnecessary because they are willing to post a partial undertaking of less than a quarter of the judgment amount," the attorney general's office wrote. "Defendants all but concede that Mr. Trump has insufficient liquid assets to satisfy the judgment."
A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Christopher M. Kise, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
However the case is resolved, Mr. Trump's request for relief represented a humbling concession from a man whose public image is synonymous with wealth. His conspicuous displays of gold-plated luxury underpinned his rise to tabloid fame, a stark contrast with the current spectacle of his scrambling to avert financial trouble.
Ms. James built her case on the accusation that Mr. Trump had fraudulently inflated his net worth by as much as $2 billion. He did so, Ms. James argued, to obtain favorable loans and other financial benefits.
Justice Engoron sided with Ms. James, concluding that Mr. Trump defrauded his lenders, who had expected him to maintain a certain net worth.
Mr. Trump's net worth is largely derived from real estate, and the sum of the judgment in the civil fraud case and the $83.3 million judgment he faces from a defamation trial involving the writer E. Jean Carroll eclipses his stockpile of cash.
As of last year, Mr. Trump was sitting on more than $350 million in cash, as well as stocks and bonds he could sell in a hurry, according to a recent New York Times review of his financial records.
Mr. Trump appears to be struggling to line up a bond in the defamation case as well. He has until early next month to do so, and his lawyers recently asked a judge to either grant him more time or reduce the size of the bond.
A bond, in simplest terms, is a document that a company provides to the court on a defendant's behalf. The bond company promises the court to cover a judgment if a defendant, in this case Mr. Trump, loses an appeal and fails to pay.
In exchange, Mr. Trump would have to pay the bond company a premium fee, typically anywhere from 1 to 3 percent of the judgment. Mr. Trump would also have to pledge collateral to the bond company, offering it cash, stocks and bonds.
Although each deal is different, companies offering appeal bonds might be unwilling to take Mr. Trump's property as collateral, especially if a building already has a mortgage, experts said.
Legal experts predicted that even if Mr. Trump loses before the five-judge appellate panel, he might still come up with a larger bond, noting that his lawyers did not characterize the $100 million bond as the only possible outcome.
"The $100 million bond resembles an opening real estate bid," said Mark Zauderer, a partner at the law firm Dorf Nelson & Zauderer who is a veteran New York business litigator and has secured many appeal bonds. "But here, the negotiation will end, because it is the court that will determine the actual dollar amount of security, not Trump."
Ben Protess is an investigative reporter at The Times, writing about public corruption. He has been covering the various criminal investigations into former President Trump and his allies. More about Ben Protess
A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 29, 2024, Section A, Page 18 of the New York edition with the headline: Court Rejects Trump's Bid to Pause $450 Million Judgment. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/nyregion/trump-bond-civil-fraud.html>
Mr. Trump's lawyers had asked the appeals court to allow him to post only a $100 million bond — a promise from an outside company that the judgment eventually will be paid — because securing one for the full amount was "impossible," they said.
A single appellate court judge assigned to consider Mr. Trump's request, Anil Singh, turned him down on Wednesday. Mr. Trump will try again next month with a panel of five appellate court judges, but for now, the former president is still on the hook to post a bond for the full amount of more than $450 million. And any company providing one would probably require him to pledge cash and other collateral that he does not yet have.
If Mr. Trump fails to secure the bond, the New York attorney general's office, which brought the case accusing him of fraudulently inflating his net worth, can collect the $454 million from him. The attorney general, Letitia James, is expected to provide Mr. Trump a 30-day grace period, which will expire on March 25, at which point she could move swiftly to seize Mr. Trump's bank accounts and perhaps take control of his New York properties.
The $454 million judgment was levied by the trial judge in the fraud case, Arthur F. Engoron, who also imposed a range of other punishments on Mr. Trump and his family business. They include a prohibition on obtaining a loan from a New York bank for three years and a ban on running a company in the state during that same period, restrictions that are complicating Mr. Trump's effort to line up a bond.
"The exorbitant and punitive amount of the judgment coupled with an unlawful and unconstitutional blanket prohibition on lending transactions would make it impossible to secure and post a complete bond," Mr. Trump's lawyers wrote to the appeals court.
Justice Singh also paused those punishments on Wednesday, potentially making it easier to obtain a bond for the full amount.
Financial relief might also come from a separate deal: Mr. Trump's stake in Trump Media & Technology Group, his social media company, could be worth up to $4 billion after a long-delayed merger is made final this year, though not in time for Ms. James's March 25 deadline.
In its own filing, Ms. James's office asked the appeals court to deny Mr. Trump's request.
"There is no merit to defendants' contention that a full bond or deposit is unnecessary because they are willing to post a partial undertaking of less than a quarter of the judgment amount," the attorney general's office wrote. "Defendants all but concede that Mr. Trump has insufficient liquid assets to satisfy the judgment."
A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Christopher M. Kise, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
However the case is resolved, Mr. Trump's request for relief represented a humbling concession from a man whose public image is synonymous with wealth. His conspicuous displays of gold-plated luxury underpinned his rise to tabloid fame, a stark contrast with the current spectacle of his scrambling to avert financial trouble.
Ms. James built her case on the accusation that Mr. Trump had fraudulently inflated his net worth by as much as $2 billion. He did so, Ms. James argued, to obtain favorable loans and other financial benefits.
Justice Engoron sided with Ms. James, concluding that Mr. Trump defrauded his lenders, who had expected him to maintain a certain net worth.
Mr. Trump's net worth is largely derived from real estate, and the sum of the judgment in the civil fraud case and the $83.3 million judgment he faces from a defamation trial involving the writer E. Jean Carroll eclipses his stockpile of cash.
As of last year, Mr. Trump was sitting on more than $350 million in cash, as well as stocks and bonds he could sell in a hurry, according to a recent New York Times review of his financial records.
Mr. Trump appears to be struggling to line up a bond in the defamation case as well. He has until early next month to do so, and his lawyers recently asked a judge to either grant him more time or reduce the size of the bond.
A bond, in simplest terms, is a document that a company provides to the court on a defendant's behalf. The bond company promises the court to cover a judgment if a defendant, in this case Mr. Trump, loses an appeal and fails to pay.
In exchange, Mr. Trump would have to pay the bond company a premium fee, typically anywhere from 1 to 3 percent of the judgment. Mr. Trump would also have to pledge collateral to the bond company, offering it cash, stocks and bonds.
Although each deal is different, companies offering appeal bonds might be unwilling to take Mr. Trump's property as collateral, especially if a building already has a mortgage, experts said.
Legal experts predicted that even if Mr. Trump loses before the five-judge appellate panel, he might still come up with a larger bond, noting that his lawyers did not characterize the $100 million bond as the only possible outcome.
"The $100 million bond resembles an opening real estate bid," said Mark Zauderer, a partner at the law firm Dorf Nelson & Zauderer who is a veteran New York business litigator and has secured many appeal bonds. "But here, the negotiation will end, because it is the court that will determine the actual dollar amount of security, not Trump."
Ben Protess is an investigative reporter at The Times, writing about public corruption. He has been covering the various criminal investigations into former President Trump and his allies. More about Ben Protess
A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 29, 2024, Section A, Page 18 of the New York edition with the headline: Court Rejects Trump's Bid to Pause $450 Million Judgment. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/nyregion/trump-bond-civil-fraud.html>
