Former President Donald Trump continues to make false claims about the New York civil fraud case he lost, including the inaccurate declaration that an appeals court had previously ruled in his favor. Trump made these claims at a campaign rally in Wisconsin the day after he posted a $175 million bond to prevent New York Attorney General Letitia James from collecting on a $454 million judgment against him. However, the truth is that the appeals court ruled to exclude Trump’s daughter Ivanka as a defendant in the case but did not dismiss the attorney general’s claims against Trump himself, his adult sons, or his company.
While Trump is entitled to argue that the judge wrongly applied the appeals court’s ruling on the statute of limitations, his repeated claims that the appeals court said he had won the case are false. The appeals court’s ruling set a specific cutoff date for claims in the case, stating that claims against Trump and the other defendants were too old if they concerned transactions completed before July 13, 2014. Judge Engoron ruled that Trump and the other defendants submitted fraudulent financial statements after this date and were therefore liable for civil fraud.
Trump’s inaccurate assertions about the appeals court ruling have been corrected by both the media and Judge Engoron himself. The judge clarified during the trial that the case arrived at the appeals court with seven causes of action and 16 defendants, and it left with the same number of causes of action and one fewer defendant. He also emphasized that the statute of limitations remained the same before and after the appeals court ruling, and acknowledged that the defendants disagreed and planned to appeal on these grounds.
Engoron’s interpretation of the appeals court ruling focused on determining when transactions were considered “completed” for the purposes of the case. He rejected the argument put forth by Trump’s lawyers that transactions should be considered complete when loan agreements were entered into and money was disbursed, regardless of later financial statements. Engoron explained that the attorney general was suing over false financial statements, not the underlying deals themselves, and each submission of a false financial statement was considered a separate fraudulent act.
While Trump has continued to claim victory in the civil fraud case, the facts remain clear – the appeals court did not rule in his favor. Instead, the court set a cutoff date for claims in the case based on the completion of transactions and the submission of fraudulent financial statements. Despite Trump’s assertions, Judge Engoron has maintained the integrity of the ruling and emphasized that the case would proceed based on the facts and legal arguments presented.
