Just kidding. Sounds like he's gonna walk away from this one too.
Law360 (September 26, 2024, 3:09 PM EDT) -- Judges on a New York appeals court expressed skepticism Thursday of a $489 million civil fraud judgment against Donald Trump, his sons, companies and their executives, raising the prospect that the fine awarded to the attorney general could be reduced or vacated.
During a special session of oral arguments, the five First Department jurists peppered attorneys on both sides with questions, with some casting doubt on Trump's core legal arguments but expressing concern about the sheer size of the fine and asking if New York Attorney General Letitia James had overstepped her broad powers to punish fraud.
Associate Justice Peter H. Moulton said there must be some limit on the state's power to investigate fraud in the marketplace, with similar concerns voiced by Associate Justice John R. Higgitt and Associate Justice David Friedman.
"I think you hear underneath all these questions, the question of mission creep," Justice Moulton said, asking whether the statute wielded by James' office had "morphed into something" that the legislature had not intended.
NY Appeals Court Casts Doubt On $489M Trump Judgment
Source: Law360Law360 (September 26, 2024, 3:09 PM EDT) -- Judges on a New York appeals court expressed skepticism Thursday of a $489 million civil fraud judgment against Donald Trump, his sons, companies and their executives, raising the prospect that the fine awarded to the attorney general could be reduced or vacated.
During a special session of oral arguments, the five First Department jurists peppered attorneys on both sides with questions, with some casting doubt on Trump's core legal arguments but expressing concern about the sheer size of the fine and asking if New York Attorney General Letitia James had overstepped her broad powers to punish fraud.
Associate Justice Peter H. Moulton said there must be some limit on the state's power to investigate fraud in the marketplace, with similar concerns voiced by Associate Justice John R. Higgitt and Associate Justice David Friedman.
"I think you hear underneath all these questions, the question of mission creep," Justice Moulton said, asking whether the statute wielded by James' office had "morphed into something" that the legislature had not intended.
