Trump's legal team filed a reply brief urging New York's Court of Appeals to throw out the $450 million civil fraud judgment, arguing the case never should have been brought.
President Donald Trump's legal team fired back Wednesday in New York's highest court, urging the Court of Appeals to throw out the $450 million civil fraud judgment and end a case they say never should have been filed. The reply brief, submitted in response to Attorney General Letitia James' push to resurrect penalties a lower court already struck down, is blunt about where things stand: "This case should have never been brought, and the judgment cannot stand."
The filing sets up what could be one of the most consequential business-law decisions in New York in years, with implications for how aggressively the attorney general can use the state's anti-fraud statute against private companies and their owners.
The fight dates back to 2022, when James sued Trump and his companies alleging roughly 200 instances of fraud tied to property valuations. Her office claimed Trump routinely overvalued New York City properties to secure better loan and insurance terms, all under New York Executive Law Section 63(12), which lets the attorney general pursue repeated fraudulent or illegal acts.
A trial court found Trump liable in 2023 and ordered $355 million plus interest in damages, along with a two-year ban on serving as an officer or director of any New York company and a three-year ban on applying for loans from New York banks. An intermediate appeals court later vacated the monetary award, but James appealed that ruling to the Court of Appeals. Wednesday's reply brief argues the liability finding itself and the remaining restrictions should be overturned along with the money.
The appeal attacks the case along five main lines. First, Trump's lawyers argue James lacked authority to bring it at all, since the case involves private commercial transactions between sophisticated parties rather than harm to the public.
Second, they contend the valuations were subjective estimates that lenders independently evaluated, not fraudulent misrepresentations. "The only supposed 'victims' here are a handful of ultrasophisticated banks and insurers that have never claimed to be injured, were eager to do business with President Trump and his family, and made over $100 million from these transactions," the filing states.
Third, the brief says the prosecution's entire premise is flawed: real estate has no single objective value, and the theory that any deviation from it equals fraud would let the attorney general "second-guess any business transaction in this State on almost any imagined grounds." Fourth, it argues the $450 million disgorgement is excessive, unlawful, and unconstitutional.
Finally, the filing points to the politically charged nature of the case. "NYAG cannot point to a single Section 63(12) enforcement action against similarly situated developers (or any other type of defendant) based on practices comparable to those alleged here," the document says.
The brief also highlights James' own words. It notes she repeatedly called Trump a "criminal," promised to "investigate President Trump and his business transactions," vowed to "take on ... his business in New York," and threatened his "family" and "anyone in his orbit."
For Trump, the appeal is another front in his broader pushback against what he has long described as lawfare weaponized against him between his two administrations. It also gives him a fresh chance to erase penalties that still hang over his New York businesses, even after the monetary award was tossed.
The Court of Appeals will now decide whether to hear full arguments and, ultimately, whether the liability finding survives. A ruling in Trump's favor would wipe out the remaining restrictions and deliver a major check on the attorney general's use of the fraud statute, while a loss would leave the case's central findings intact.
Legal observers are watching closely because the outcome could set precedent for how far New York's top prosecutor can stretch Section 63(12) against businesses. James' office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the filing.
For now, the ball sits with New York's highest court, and the Trump family's long-running legal war with the attorney general is one step closer to a final verdict.
Trump's legal team filed a reply brief urging New York's Court of Appeals to throw out the $450 million civil fraud judgment, arguing the case never should have been brought.
freedomlinedispatch.com
