Trump can’t postpone paying $355M judgment in NY fraud case, judge rules

Trump can’t postpone paying $355M judgment in NY fraud case, judge rules

Former President Donald Trump suffered a legal setback on Thursday as his attempt to delay a New York court ruling was rejected. The ruling requires him to pay $355 million and imposes a three-year ban on his business activities in the state. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron denied Trump’s request for a postponement, stating that his attorneys had not provided sufficient justification for the delay. In an email filed in the case, Engoron criticized the lack of explanation from Trump’s legal team and expressed confidence in the Appellate Division to protect Trump’s appellate rights.

The civil fraud case, which involves Trump, the Trump Organization, and others, saw a judgment last week from Engoron. The judge reiterated that Trump’s lawyers failed to present any compelling reasons for a stay in the proceedings. Meanwhile, the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the case against the former president, submitted a proposed judgment order to the court on Tuesday, based on Engoron’s previous ruling.

However, Trump’s attorney, Clifford Robert, pushed back on Wednesday, alleging procedural errors by the AG’s Office and asserting that the defense should be given an opportunity to propose a counter-judgment. Despite these objections, Engoron proceeded to sign the judgment on Thursday. The next step involves the court clerk finalizing the judgment, after which Trump and his co-defendants, including his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr., will have a 30-day window to file an appeal.

The legal battle marks another chapter in the ongoing scrutiny faced by Trump and his business dealings. The judgment represents a significant financial and regulatory blow to the former president and underscores the legal challenges he continues to confront even after leaving office. As the case progresses, it remains to be seen how Trump and his legal team will navigate the appellate process and whether they can overturn the unfavorable ruling.