Bans, Monitors and Financial Penalties
Last Friday, (2/16/24), Judge Engoron concluded the NY civil fraud trial by issuing his 92-page ruling. The judge found Trump et al are unremorseful and highly likely to commit fraud again. "Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on the pathological, " the judge said. Accordingly:
Bans: Trump is banned for three years from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation, The Trump sons were banned for two years.
Oversight: The Trump Organization shall be required to obtain prior approval from court-appointed monitor Judge Jones before submitting any financial disclosure to a third party. Such disclosure will be reviewed in advance for material misrepresentations. Additionally, an independent director of compliance will be installed at the Trump Organization to ensure compliance with financial reporting obligations.
In other words, Trump can remain the owner, but he has lost direct control of the businesses in question. His ability to directly manage or oversee his New York corporations , and play fast and loose with the numbers is gone.
Disgorgement: Trump must pay $454 million in total penalties. That includes about $355 million in disgorgement and more than $98 million in prejudgment interest at a 9% annual rate. The interest will continue to accrue until the total amount is paid.
Appeal: Trump has vowed to appeal this ruling. That raises two immediate questions:
1. To appeal, Trump must post the full amount of the cash, plus a bit more, or a bond. Will he be able to do that, and if so how will he do it?
2. Appellate courts often grant full or partial stays of the lower-court ruling that is being appealed. If Trump actually appeals, will the appellate court grant a stay in this case? If so, will the stay be limited and apply to only parts of the ruling, or will it apply to the full ruling?
The third question is, will the appeal succeed? The legal experts I listen to are saying there is nothing in Engoron's order that would justify reversal or another trial. There may be some tweaking around the edges by the appellate court but the ruling is likely to stand.
Last Friday, (2/16/24), Judge Engoron concluded the NY civil fraud trial by issuing his 92-page ruling. The judge found Trump et al are unremorseful and highly likely to commit fraud again. "Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on the pathological, " the judge said. Accordingly:
Bans: Trump is banned for three years from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation, The Trump sons were banned for two years.
Oversight: The Trump Organization shall be required to obtain prior approval from court-appointed monitor Judge Jones before submitting any financial disclosure to a third party. Such disclosure will be reviewed in advance for material misrepresentations. Additionally, an independent director of compliance will be installed at the Trump Organization to ensure compliance with financial reporting obligations.
In other words, Trump can remain the owner, but he has lost direct control of the businesses in question. His ability to directly manage or oversee his New York corporations , and play fast and loose with the numbers is gone.
Disgorgement: Trump must pay $454 million in total penalties. That includes about $355 million in disgorgement and more than $98 million in prejudgment interest at a 9% annual rate. The interest will continue to accrue until the total amount is paid.
Appeal: Trump has vowed to appeal this ruling. That raises two immediate questions:
1. To appeal, Trump must post the full amount of the cash, plus a bit more, or a bond. Will he be able to do that, and if so how will he do it?
2. Appellate courts often grant full or partial stays of the lower-court ruling that is being appealed. If Trump actually appeals, will the appellate court grant a stay in this case? If so, will the stay be limited and apply to only parts of the ruling, or will it apply to the full ruling?
The third question is, will the appeal succeed? The legal experts I listen to are saying there is nothing in Engoron's order that would justify reversal or another trial. There may be some tweaking around the edges by the appellate court but the ruling is likely to stand.
Last edited:
