[ad_1]
- New York’s attorney general has asked a judge to issue partial summary judgment against Donald Trump in her $250 million lawsuit accusing the former president of widespread fraud.
- Attorney General Letitia James cited what she called “a mountain of indisputable evidence” of false and misleading financial statements over a decade.
- James’ request comes two months before the civil lawsuit against the former president, The Trump Organization, and his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump is due to begin trial in New York Supreme Court in Manhattan.
State Attorney General Letitia James is seen during a gun violence prevention public safety announcement at City Hall, July 31, 2023.
Lev Radin | Pacific Press | Light Rocket | Getty Images
New York Attorney General A asked Judge Wed for summary summary judgment against Donald Trump at $250 million lawsuit accusing the former president of fraud on a massive scale, citing what it called a “mountain of indisputable evidence” of false and misleading financial statements.
In a lawsuit, Letitia James said the evidence shows that if Trump’s net worth was calculated correctly, it would be between 17% and 39% less than what he claimed every year over a decade, “which translates into enormous wealth.” $1 billion or more in every year except one.
The alleged false statements included Trump’s years in the White House, according to the filing.
James’ filing comes two months before the civil lawsuit against the former president, the Trump Organization, and his two sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, is scheduled to begin trial in New York Supreme Court in Manhattan.
James is suing the Trump family for defrauding banks, insurance companies and others using false financial statements.
This trial will still proceed to address the other claims, even if Judge Arthur Engoron grants James’ request for a partial partial judgment and finds that Trump and the co-defendants committed fraud under New York business law.
In her proposal, James says, Enguron should only answer “two simple, straightforward questions” to get to this conclusion.
One question, the attorney general wrote, was whether Trump’s annual statements about his financial situation were “false or misleading.”
Another question, she wrote, is whether Trump and his co-defendants repeatedly used the financial statements to conduct business transactions.
The motion stated that “the answer to both questions is a resounding ‘yes’ based on the mountain of undisputed evidence cited” in documents provided by James’s office.
“Based on the undisputed evidence, no court trial is required to determine that Defendants provided grossly and materially inflated asset values in SFCs (financial statements) and then repeatedly used those SFCs in business transactions to defraud banks and insurance companies,” James wrote. .
“Despite Defendants’ mustering of 13 experts, this is ultimately a case of documentation, and the documents leave no doubt that Mr. Trump’s SFC statements do not even remotely reflect the “assessed present value” of his assets as they stand.” The proposal stated that trading would take place between knowledgeable market participants.
This is breaking news. Check back for updates.
[ad_2]
Source link
