Case: People of the State of New York v. Trump

This case challenged what the New York Attorney General described as a decade-long scheme by Donald J. Trump, the Trump Organization, and senior executives to inflate asset values and misrepresent financial information to obtain favorable loan and insurance terms, raising significant questions about the scope of state enforcement authority over persistent corporate fraud. On September 21, 2022, the People of the State of New York, through Attorney General Letitia James, filed this civil enforcement action in the New York Supreme Court, New York County, against Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Allen Weisselberg, Jeffrey McConney, and multiple Trump Organization entities under Executive Law § 63(12). The case was assigned to Justice Arthur F. Engoron.

The Attorney General alleged that defendants repeatedly prepared and submitted materially false Statements of Financial Condition (SFCs) that dramatically inflated the value of key assets, including the Trump Tower triplex apartment, Mar-a-Lago, 40 Wall Street, and several golf courses. According to the complaint, these misrepresentations enabled defendants to secure hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and insurance coverage on more favorable terms from institutions such as Deutsche Bank and Zurich Insurance. The State asserted that this conduct constituted persistent fraud under § 63(12), which does not require proof of reliance or intent and authorizes broad equitable relief to protect the integrity of New York’s marketplace.

Before trial, Justice Engoron granted summary judgment on liability, holding that defendants’ financial statements were objectively false and misleading as a matter of law. 2023 WL 6307177.

Following an eleven-week bench trial on remedies and remaining issues, the court issued a February 2024 decision reaffirming liability and sharply criticizing defendants’ credibility. The court found that Donald Trump and senior Trump Organization executives provided evasive and non-credible testimony, while former Trump attorney Michael Cohen was deemed credible and corroborated by documentary evidence. The court emphasized defendants’ “complete lack of contrition,” concluding that absent significant injunctive relief, defendants were likely to continue engaging in fraudulent practices.2024 WL 733991

Justice Engoron initially imposed approximately $464 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest, including more than $450 million against Donald Trump, $4.01 million each against Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, and $1 million against Allen Weisselberg. The court also ordered extensive non-monetary relief, including multi-year bans prohibiting Donald Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation, shorter bans for his sons, the appointment of an independent monitor, and the installation of an independent compliance director to oversee the Trump Organization’s financial practices.2024 WL 733991

On appeal, the New York Appellate Division, First Department, largely affirmed the liability findings and injunctive relief but vacated the monetary disgorgement award on August 21, 2025, concluding that the nearly half-billion-dollar financial penalty was unconstitutionally excessive. The appellate court left intact the findings of persistent fraud, the governance bans, and the continued oversight of the Trump Organization, emphasizing the State’s strong interest in preventing deception in financial markets. The Attorney General publicly stated an intent to seek reinstatement of the monetary penalties, and further appellate proceedings remained possible. 2025 WL 2412681.

As of the appellate ruling, the defendants remained subject to ongoing injunctive oversight and corporate governance restrictions, while the dispute over financial remedies continued.

This case is now closed.