Ugh Judge Singh? I had one case before him once. NOT impressed. Our client got railroaded by a large insurance company who took the position that our client could not sue on standing grounds (he was a judgment creditor of an insured but only became a judgment creditor after the insurance company disclaimed coverage, and won, because the insured went bankrupt and didn’t defend the disclaimer). Actually Judge Singh took over for a judge who retired who was very receptive to our position, and then retired. The first judge ruled in our favor that our client had standing, but Judge Singh, while technically bound by the first judge’s ruling essentially ruled “well you can sue, but you can’t actually win.”
Is he in the Appellate Division now? Yikes.
Been in First Dept appeals since 2017.
As I understand it, Trump can appeal no matter what. But, without the bond, the court will seize his properties. They can then begin to sell off his properties before the appeal process is complete. Jonathan Turley and even RAT SCOTUS attorneys say this judgment will not stand. So, he will have the fine reduced or vacated on appeal at some point. It would seem that a judge knowing what is coming at some point will prevent the State from selling off Trump's assets. If that does not happen, Trump cannot sue the State, but the State must return the money it got from selling his properties. Is that correct?
One article I read and a point I believe Truley made also indicate that not securing a bond from a bank that does business in NY prevented him from posting the total amount. Also, having the properties managed by the state-appointed receiver prevents the Trumps from taking a loan against the properties as they no longer control them. Now they are back in control of their business; they can use those assets as collateral for a loan from a bank certified in NY State.
Trump can now secure a bond for the entire amount from any bank, making it possible for him to obtain one. So, while I disagree with the judge, he is only the first step, and he has at least made it possible for Trump to stop the seizure of his properties. Is that correct?
Trump may or may not prevail in New York State, but this fine is so egregious that I suspect it will end up in Federal Court. While rare, it would not be the first time SCOTUS took up such a case. Somewhere along the way, someone will split the baby. At the Federal level, they may vacate the sentence, but it is also likely the State may lower the amount to a level Trump will pay to clear the books.