Court rules Trump can post $175 million bond instead of over $450 million penalty he owes in fraud case: 'Unexpected victory'

A New York appellate court on Monday ruled that former President Donald Trump can post a $175 million bond instead of the over $450 million penalty he owes in his headline-grabbing civil fraud case, the New York Times reported.

The paper characterized the ruling as "a crucial and unexpected victory" for Trump.

Indeed, far-left New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the unprecedented case against the former commander in chief, set Monday as the deadline for Trump to fork over the massive sum — or she would begin seizing his properties.

Monday was a day James likely relished, given she campaigned on the promise that she would go after Trump and has made statements along the way underscoring her obsession with securing the keys to his iconic properties — such as when James earlier told ABC News, "Yes, I look at 40 Wall Street each and every day.”

James will have to keep daydreaming for now.

The Times said the court gave Trump 10 days to obtain the $175 million bond, adding that "two people with knowledge of his finances said he should be able to secure it by then." The paper also said the bond will prevent James from collecting on the judgment while Trump appeals.

Trump attorney Christopher Kise told ABC News the court "no doubt recognized the rule of law must triumph over the political agenda of the Attorney General. President Trump looks forward to a full and fair appellate process which overturns the judgment and ends the Attorney General's abuse of power and tyrannical pursuit of the front running candidate for President of the United States."

In the wake of the appellate court ruling, a spokesperson for James told ABC News that "the $464 million judgment — plus interest — against Donald Trump and the other defendants still stands." The statement also said Trump "is still facing accountability for his staggering fraud."

But even if eventually Trump fails to get the massive judgment against him overturned, and he runs out of financial options, and James moves forward with seizing his properties, a separate report Sunday from the New York Times indicated that James would face a daunting challenge.

'Spider web of transactions'

The Times said attorneys "warn that getting control over, and trying to liquidate, any of the former president’s flagship properties is an uphill battle" and that James likely is looking at untangling a "spider web of transactions."

“People are really, really good at litigating and getting to the point of a judgment,” Brad Eric Scheler, senior counsel at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, told the Times. “But they never focus on the fact that collecting on a judgment is very hard.”

First off, the paper noted that Trump doesn't outright own almost any of his properties; instead, the Times said, they are "protected by a maze of interlocking trusts and limited liability companies."

“Let me give you an analogy,” Scheler continued to the paper, explaining how Yellow Cab operators are similarly protected. “Taxi fleets had each of their taxis in a separate corporation, so that if the taxi was in a car accident and the insurance didn’t cover it, it would be limited to the entity that had the cab.”

What's more, lawyers told the Times that if James seizes a Trump property with mortgages or loans against it, those debts must be paid first.

“It’s 1,000 percent complicated, and the reason it is 1,000 percent complicated is there are creditors and equity holders that are ahead of Letitia James,” commercial bankruptcy lawyer Leo Jacobs told the paper. “Imagine 40 Wall Street is worth $250 million, and there’s $200 million collateralized against it. After transfer taxes and fees, she will be left with $1 million. Is it worth it to enforce the judgment? The answer is no, it’s not.”

More from the Times:

For some of the buildings, the ownership structure is so complex that it becomes unclear what, if anything, the court could seize.

Take the sleek skyscraper at 1290 Avenue of the Americas. Nearly two decades ago, Mr. Trump acquired a 30 percent stake in an entity that owns the 43-story building in Midtown Manhattan adjacent to Radio City Music Hall. The other 70 percent is owned by the Vornado Partnership Trust.

The fine print of the partnership makes it difficult, maybe even impossible, for Mr. Trump to sell his 30 percent stake. Initially set to expire in 2044, the partnership states that “a partner may not, directly or indirectly, sell, assign, transfer or otherwise dispose of any part of their partnership interest, without prior written consent from the majority owner,” according to an excerpt from the agreement shared during the trial.

In the lawsuit, Ms. James argued that Mr. Trump and his proxies had inflated the value of this property by treating it as if it were an asset that could be bought and sold.

Now, if the same asset is seized, the state will face the same limitations that they uncovered during the trial — namely that he is more or less stuck in this partnership for another two decades, said real estate attorneys.

Frank Luntz to James: 'You’re going to elect Donald Trump'

Beyond the mountain of paperwork, red tape, and legal roadblocks ahead of James if she goes through with seizing Trump's properties, pollster Frank Luntz on Thursday warned James that she is "going to elect Donald Trump" if she goes this route.

Here's a snippet of what Luntz told a CNN panel:

I want you to remember this moment, and don’t forget it: If the New York attorney general starts to take his homes away, starts to seize his assets — it’s all gonna be on camera, pundits are gonna sit there and scream ... 'This man cannot be elected' — you’re going to create the greatest victimhood of 2024, and you’re going to elect Donald Trump. If they take his stuff, he’s gonna say that this is proof that the federal government and the establishment in the swamp in Washington and all the politicians across the country and the attorneys generals and all of this, that this is a conspiracy to deny him the presidency. He’s gonna go up in the polls just like he went up every single time they indicted him. The indictment, and let’s not talk about whether it’s justified or not, but it will prove the things that he’s saying on the campaign trail, and he will go up, and it may just elect him president. Do not forget that.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!