Lawyers for former President Donald Trump filed two briefs with the First Department of the New York Appellate Division, arguing that the civil fraud case filed against Trump earlier this year was flawed, that there were no victims and that the case was time-barred.
The two letters, filed late Friday night, contained many of the same arguments Trump’s lawyers have previously made in the case.
“President Trump’s business partners were happy about these deals. They benefited enormously, making over $100 million in profit,” attorneys Cliff Robert and Alina Habba argue in their 46-page final effort to prevent Trump from paying what they call an “egregious and unconstitutional” $485 million settlement. conviction for fraud.
It’s the latest update in a months-long appeals saga that began after a judge ruled that Trump and his family had participated in a scheme to overstate his wealth on financial statements, allowing Trump to benefit from cheap loan and insurance rates. he might otherwise not have been entitled to it.
Habba and Robert again insisted that none of Trump’s business associates were defrauded and were in fact repaid on time or early, “a stark contrast to today’s credit market where defaults are at an all-time high.”
As they forcefully did during the three-month trial, Robert and Habba disputed the court’s valuation of Mar-a-Lago at between $18 million and $27 million. Attorneys said the assets are worth more than $1 billion.
They also said State Attorney Letitia James’ statements about the financial situation at the center of the case against Trump were understated. President Trump’s property values, claiming that his net worth is much higher than the statements suggest.
In a filing last week, New York state attorneys urged an appeals court to uphold the nearly $500 million fine, arguing that there is overwhelming evidence that Trump lied for years about his wealth and saying his complaint is full of “meritless legal arguments,” leaving ignore the volumes. Trial evidence showing that he and his co-accused engaged in “fraud and illegality on an enormous scale.”
A separate brief filed by Trump’s attorneys concerns the sanctions imposed on the trial attorneys who represented Trump, arguing that the district court erred in imposing sanctions against the attorney for what they say were “good faith” legal arguments.
“It is perfectly appropriate for an attorney to make arguments that the trial judge may disagree with in order to preserve them for appellate review,” argued attorney Brian Isaac.
Oral statements at the Court of Appeal begin on September 26.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
