Appellate Division Judge Anil Singh turned down former President Donald Trump’s request that he be permitted to post an appeal bond in an amount less than the full lower court judgment plus interest, in order to prevent the state from seizing assets.

However, Singh paused the three-year ban on Trump seeking loans from New York banks. The appellate order also allows Trump to run his New York companies for now.

New York Trial Court Justice Arthur Engoron ordered Trump to pay $355 million and another $100 million in interest for supposedly defrauding someone. I guess the banks, even though the banks defended Trump.

Trump offered to post a $100 million bond.

But Singh said Trump has to post a bond in the full amount “to stop enforcement of the judgment” while he appeals.

The 30-day countdown to pay the fine started on February 23. He needs to post the money around March 25.

Anyway. Don’t give these people ammunition. Don’t ever brag about your wealth:

The ruling by Justice Anil Singh ratchets up pressure on Trump to either pay the full amount—nearing half-a billion dollars with interest—or put up a bond that Trump’s lawyers estimated at $550 million to hold off collection while he appeals.

Lawyers for Trump, a billionaire and Republican presidential front-runner famously boastful about the size of his wealth, acknowledged he lacks the liquidity to cover the judgment. They said he might have to unload his prized real estate in a fire sale without judicial intervention.

The appeals judge didn’t provide any reasons for his decision, which will be reviewed by an appellate panel that will look more closely at the merits of Trump’s arguments. The panel likely won’t review the issue for at least several weeks.

However, Singh gave Trump some relief from nonmonetary sanctions. In a one-page order, he suspended penalties that prohibited his two eldest sons from running the Trump Organization for two years and restricted his business from borrowing money. Lifting the restrictions could make it easier for Trump to post a complete bond.

…Notably, the witnesses for banks said that they did not lose any money on the prior deals and wanted more business with Trump. This will give banks that opportunity. Notably, a bond would still cost Trump a considerable amount even if he prevails. https://t.co/OT6qYwXk8t

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 28, 2024

…This remains a daunting burden. Banks may have to weigh the merits of a novel case to judge the risk. Ordinarily, such risk or unknowns impact the conditions of the loan. Trump could take a further appeal on the deposit issue but he is presumably working the market for a loan…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 28, 2024

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.