LRHF said:

---

"Come And Take it"

---

The state of New York may very well.

Interesting, but Trump still has to pay by March 15th.

fc2112 said:

---

LRHF said:

---

"Come And Take it"

---

The state of New York may very well.

---

You happy? You kind of seem like you're trying to hide your joy.

fc2112 said:

---

Interesting, but Trump still has to pay by March 15th.

---

He has to have the bond in place by then.

What would be glorious - in a just world - would be for Trump to sell off property in a market that he thinks has pretty well peaked, then to win appeal & collect interest, and then to be able to go after these folks in a friendly court room for malicious prosecution.

An unlikely daydreaming - but it would be lovely.

Don't see how ANYONE views NY or CA as appealing in ANY respect.

pacecar02 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

A New York appeal bond serves a very special purposeto pause the execution of a judgment while the defendant appeals the court's ruling and the award of damages to the plaintiff. Defendants who have lost a case in a New York court cannot appeal that decision until they have purchased an appeal bond to show the court that they are not merely trying to delay paying a judgment, but have reasonable grounds for a successful appeal.

A New York appeal bond also serves as the defendant's guarantee to make good on the judgment if the appeal turns out to be unsuccessful. In New York, appeal bonds must be in an amount that will cover the judgment. Most sureties require these bonds to be fully collateralized to provide funds for immediate payment to the plaintiff if the appellate court rules against the defendant and upholds the judgment.

---

Quote:

---

Anyone appealing a New York court's ruling in a civil matter is required to purchase an appeal bond in an amount that is equal toor in some cases more thanthe amount of the judgment under appeal. Be aware that only court-ordered judgments, not negotiated settlements, can be appealed.

The defendant will be unable to complete the process of filing an appeal until the necessary New York appeal bond has been purchased and submitted to the Clerk of the Court in which the case was originally decided. The bond must be fully collateralized, typically in the form of a cashier's check or irrevocable letter of credit.

---

Letter of credit? Like from a lender? LOL.

Quote:

---

Collateralization of a New York appeal bond means that the defendant's personal credit history is not a big factor in the surety bond's determination of the premium rate the defendant will pay for the bond. In most cases, that premium rate will be 2% or less on a fully collateralized basis. For bonds that are able to be obtained with partial or no collateral, the premium may range from 1.5% to 3%.

---

LINK

---

it would be funny to limit the bond to just Mar-a-lago

---

And have it valued at $350 million...not $18 million.

Antoninus said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

When does Trump have to pay $355 MM?

There has to be a deadline, eight? If appealing, he still has to put up?

Does he have $355 MM liquid? How do the finances work on this?

---

Depends what you mean by "deadline." (Bill Clinton reference)

I've not researched New York law, but as a general rule the successful plaintiff cannot commence efforts to COLLECT a judgment until the appellate deadline has passed. In most places, that is 30 days. So, Trump and his stuff are safe for that long, anyway.

If Trump decides to appeal and wants to protect his assets in the process, he must post a bond. In New York, that can be a cash bond (approx. $400mm paid into the court registry) or a surety bond (some reputable financial institution guaranteeing that they will pay the judgment if Trump loses on appeal and then fails to pay the judgment). The chances of any financial institution providing him with a surety bond of this magnitude are IMO ... slim, at best. So he will need to deposit a cash bond.

If he appeals but fails to submit a bond (if that is even possible in NY, it is not in some jurisdictions), the successful Plaintiff (here, the state of New York) can proceed with collection efforts ... seizing assets and such ... while the appeal is ongoing.

I THINK that addresses all potential aspects of your question.

---

What if they seize and take ownership of those assets - like property - and then Trump wins the appeal?

Return them with interest?

aggiehawg said:

---

Collateralization of a New York appeal bond means that the defendant's personal credit history is not a big factor in the surety bond's determination of the premium rate the defendant will pay for the bond. In most cases, that premium rate will be 2% or less on a fully collateralized basis. For bonds that are able to be obtained with partial or no collateral, the premium may range from 1.5% to 3%.

---

So a bond on a $350,000,000 at 1.5 - 3% would be between 5.25 and 10.5 million dollars. No big deal for Trump.

Also saw this on another thread -

🚨BREAKING: The SEC has approved the merger of $DWAC and Truth Social. President Trump is expected to profit almost 4 BILLION dollars given his 58% stake in the company and the current stock price.

The leftists trying to bankrupt Trump are in shambles. pic.twitter.com/3VB1xNjjAY

— Pro Swing Trading 📈😎🇺🇸 (@Pro__Trading) February 16, 2024

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

This is our country now. It doesn't deserve the name America anymore. Whatever country it is, sucks. It's only a matter of time until it completely collapses.

USA sucks now its pretty much an economic zone now

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

We are no better than Russia. Our weaponized federal agencies collude with the private sector to rig/influence the elections. That is a FACT. Then there's disgusting banana republic crap like this.

---

Do you not know what a banana republic is?

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

We are no better than Russia. Our weaponized federal agencies collude with the private sector to rig/influence the elections. That is a FACT. Then there's disgusting banana republic crap like this.

---

Do you not know what a banana republic is?

---

We live in one. We're all becoming quite familiar.

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

We are no better than Russia. Our weaponized federal agencies collude with the private sector to rig/influence the elections. That is a FACT. Then there's disgusting banana republic crap like this.

---

Do you not know what a banana republic is?

---

do you know what a metaphor is?

Ag with kids said:

---

What if they seize and take ownership of those assets - like property - and then Trump wins the appeal?

Return them with interest?

---

No idea. Never seen that happen. In fact, I've never seen a case in which an appellate bond was not posted, though I understand that it is possible in some places.

No bond, no appeal is how I read the NY law.

Maroon Dawn said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

Let's test that: was this judgement fair or a political attack that was the result of judge and jury shopping to get a verdict

---

Trump is an extremist and so he is one of those cancer cells.

In any case, I think that the real question is whether someone else doing the same thing could be prosecuted. Frauds are common and they are based on misrepresentations and they do go to trial. There were seven counts in this trial. Are there any counts there that someone else might have been charged with?

I would bet that there is plenty of case law on each of those causes of action. The first seemed rather flaky since it was part of a section on the duties of the attorney general, but the other six likely have plenty of case law behind them. Have any of those cases for the other six causes of actions ever been successfully used against someone who committed the same or less violations of them as Trump?

That first cause of action seems somewhat shocking. Was it ever intended to be used as a cause of action or to bring charges? Is there any case law involving it?

In any event, even if that was was a big stretch, that would not mean that the other six causes of action were somehow invalid.

aggiehawg said:

---

No bond, no appeal is how I read the NY law.

---

I think that I saw reporting to that effect re this case, but I will be real honest here. I don't trust reporters to EVER "get it right" when reporting on the effect of legal matters. They just don't have the background to understand what they are reporting, so they usually garble it.

John Armfield said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I hate this country. Leftists are cancer cells.

---

I don't hate the country, but do consider extremists of any persuasion to be cancer cells.

---

We are no better than Russia. Our weaponized federal agencies collude with the private sector to rig/influence the elections. That is a FACT. Then there's disgusting banana republic crap like this.

---

Do you not know what a banana republic is?

---

do you know what a metaphor is?

---

So then we could justifiably refer to Trump as a banana republic by using it as some kind of metaphor?

I was referring what the New York Surety company said.

Quote:

---

A New York appeal bond serves a very special purposeto pause the execution of a judgment while the defendant appeals the court's ruling and the award of damages to the plaintiff. Defendants who have lost a case in a New York court cannot appeal that decision until they have purchased an appeal bond to show the court that they are not merely trying to delay paying a judgment, but have reasonable grounds for a successful appeal.

---

LINK

If the appeals court threw out the first cause of action as being used wrongly, how would that affect the judgment? There were, after all, seven causes of action, not just the one.

It doesn't seem reasonable to just throw out X% of the damages. I assume that it would go back to a new trial to determine damages. Is that correct?

It obviously goes to whomever was defrauded

aggiehawg said:

---

I was referring what the New York Surety company said.

Quote:

---

A New York appeal bond serves a very special purposeto pause the execution of a judgment while the defendant appeals the court's ruling and the award of damages to the plaintiff. Defendants who have lost a case in a New York court cannot appeal that decision until they have purchased an appeal bond to show the court that they are not merely trying to delay paying a judgment, but have reasonable grounds for a successful appeal.

---

LINK

---

That may well be correct. I am just not accepting it at face value without reviewing the New York equivalent of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, and I am not going to do that because (frankly) I do not care enough.

If the currently-hypothetical question of Trump attempting to appeal without filing either a cash or surety bond ever becomes something closer to reality, that might change, but I don't see that happening.

1) He shouldn't pay
2) If does pay anything, he should pay her lyin' ass in pennies

Never.

This won't survive appeals.

annie88 said:

---

Never.

This won't survive appeals.

---

I wonder on what specific grounds it might it be successfully appealed.

eric76 said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Never.

This won't survive appeals.

---

I wonder on what specific grounds it might it be successfully appealed.

---

No one will answer.

It is like the typical hoodrat criminal defendant, chanting the mantra of "I'm gonna appeal!"

On what basis, my friend? Where is the reversible error?

"I don't like this result" is not a legally-sound appellate point.

Antoninus said:

---

eric76 said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Never.

This won't survive appeals.

---

I wonder on what specific grounds it might it be successfully appealed.

---

No one will answer.

It is like the typical hoodrat criminal defendant, chanting the mantra of "I'm gonna appeal!"

On what basis, my friend? Where is the reversible error?

"I don't like this result" is not a legally-sound appellate point.

---

Aggiehawg posted something on pg. 1 that scotus has found awards to be excessive or grossly excessive before. I don't know the law but if it's been done before then I think it means they at least have a leg to stand on in an appeal.

If Trump is not allowed to get an appeal bond with non cash collateral and doesn't have enough cash on hand, his main lender Deutsche Bank can just give him a low interest loan to cover the Letter Of Credit. There are many ways to skin this cat.

I haven't seen this question asked: how is this not an Eighth Amendment violation?

Quote:

---

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

---

Based on the above all Trump's cases should be immediately dropped

How did the judge come up with the numbers?

If they are entirely fines, then they would seem to be excessive.

If they are largely the disgorgement of money that he got as a result of fraud, then they might not be excessive. After all, if someone commits fraud to take $500,000,000, then a $10 fine wouldn't be much of a deterrant.