Former President Donald Trump may not have sufficient funds to cover a $464 million civil fraud judgment in the event he loses his appeal, cautioned New York’s chief legal officer in a court filing on Monday.
New York Attorney General Letitia James expressed this concern while advocating that Trump and his co-defendants should be obligated to provide cash or bonds to cover the entire fraud judgment if they seek to delay payment while contesting the ruling.
“Defendants have never demonstrated that Mr. Trump’s liquid assets—which may fluctuate over time—will be enough to satisfy the full amount of this judgment following appeal,” James stated in her submission to a New York appeals court.
She also highlighted the possibility of Trump’s real estate holdings decreasing in value during the appeal process, while post-judgment interest accumulates.
Additionally, James noted that Trump’s financial situation could be further strained by his ongoing civil and criminal legal battles, including a recent jury verdict ordering him to pay $83.3 million for defaming writer E. Jean Carroll.
Trump “has substantial liabilities that may reduce his liquid assets further, including other outstanding money judgments against him, and he faces multiple criminal indictments,” James asserted.
The absence of a full bond, according to James, could potentially lead the civil fraud defendants—Trump, his two adult sons, his company, and its top executives—to attempt to avoid or worsen enforcement of the judgment if they lose the appeal.
James urged the appeals court to dismiss Trump’s request to stay the judgment with a $100 million bond, which is less than a quarter of the total amount awarded by Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron.
Trump’s attorneys did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment on James’ filing.
The defense team had argued that the smaller bond amount, along with continued oversight of the Trump Organization’s assets by a court-appointed financial monitor, would suffice to secure the judgment.
They claimed that obtaining a full appeal bond, potentially exceeding $550 million, would be “impossible” due to the judgment barring Trump from seeking loans in New York.
James challenged this assertion, emphasizing that the defendants had not provided information on their efforts to secure a bond before filing their motion. She also noted that Trump’s prohibition from borrowing does not hinder obtaining appeal bonds since they are not loans.
Appeal bonds are designed to ensure that the party awarded damages at trial can collect if the verdict is upheld on appeal. The bond poster retrieves their deposit if they win the appeal.
