New York attorney general seeks summary judgment

0 4

New York Attorney General Letitia James is seen during a public safety announcement to prevent gun violence at City Hall, July 31, 2023.

Lev Radin | Pacific Press | White clouds | Getty Images

New York Attorney General Letitia James asked a judge Wednesday for a partial summary judgment against Donald Trump in her $250 million lawsuit accusing the former president of widespread fraud, citing what she called “a mountain of indisputable evidence” of false and misleading financial statements.

In a court filing, James said evidence shows that if Trump’s net worth was accurately calculated, it would be between 17% and 39% lower than what he claimed every year over a decade,” which means the large sum of $1. billion or more in all but one year.”

The alleged false statements spanned years when Trump was in the White House, according to the filing.

James’ filing comes two months before the trial begins in the civil suit against the former president; The Trump Organization; and his son, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, at the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan.

James is suing the Trumps for defrauding banks, insurance companies and others by using false financial statements.

That trial would still take place to address other claims, even if Judge Arthur Engoron grants James’ request for partial summary judgment and finds Trump and the other defendants defrauded under New York business law. York.

James, in his motion, says that Engoron only needs to answer “two simple and complex questions” to make that decision.

CNBC Politics

Read more about CNBC’s politics coverage:

One question is whether Trump’s annual statements about his financial condition were “false or deceptive,” the attorney general wrote.

The other question, she wrote, is whether Trump and his co-defendants again used the financial statements to conduct business transactions.

“The answer to both questions is very strong based on the mountain of indisputable evidence cited” in the documents submitted by James’ office, the motion said.

“Based on the undisputed evidence, there is no need for a trial for the Court to conclude that the defendants entered inflated and substantial asset values ​​in the SFCs. [financial statements] and then used these SFCs again and again in business transactions to defraud banks and insurers,” James wrote.

“Despite the Defendants’ number of 13 experts, at the end of the day this is a matter of documents, and the documents leave no doubt that Mr. Trump’s SFCs do not even show ‘value current estimated assets as they are. trading between experienced market participants,” the motion said.

CNBC has requested comment from an attorney for Trump.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.