Connect with us

New York

The Civil Fraud Ruling on Donald Trump, Annotated

Published

on

The Civil Fraud Ruling on Donald Trump, Annotated

Former President Donald J. Trump was penalized $355 million, plus millions more in interest, and banned for three years from serving in any top roles at a New York company, including his own, in a ruling on Friday by Justice Arthur F. Engoron. The decision comes after the state Attorney General Letitia James sued Mr. Trump, members of his family and his company in 2022.

The ruling expands on Justice Engoron’s decision last fall, which found that Mr. Trump’s financial statements were filled with fraudulent claims. Mr. Trump will appeal the financial penalty and is likely to appeal other restrictions; he has already appealed last fall’s ruling.

The New York Times annotated the document.

Download the original PDF.

Advertisement

New York Times Analysis

Next »

1

This ruling by Justice Arthur F. Engoron is a result of a 2022 lawsuit filed by New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, against Donald J. Trump and the Trump Organization; his adult sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump; the company’s former chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg and former controller Jeffrey McConney; and several of their related entities. Mr. Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, was also initially a defendant until an appeals court dismissed the case against her.

Advertisement
Page 2 of undefined PDF document.
Page 3 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

2

The law under which Ms. James sued, known by its shorthand 63(12), requires the plaintiff to show a defendant’s conduct was deceptive. If that standard is met, a judge can impose severe punishment, including forfeiting the money obtained through fraud. Ms. James has also used this law against the oil company ExxonMobil, the tobacco brand Juul and the pharma executive Martin Shkreli.

Advertisement
Page 4 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

3

Justice Engoron is now providing a background of this case. This ruling comes after a three-year investigation by the attorney general’s office and the conclusion of a trial that ended last month. But this likely won’t be Mr. Trump’s last word on the matter — he will appeal the financial penalty and is likely to appeal other restrictions, as he has already appealed other rulings.

4

Advertisement

In late 2022, Justice Engoron assigned a former federal judge, Barbara Jones, to serve as a monitor at the Trump Organization and tasked her with keeping an eye on the company and its lending relationships. Last month, she issued a report citing inconsistencies in its financial reporting, which “may reflect a lack of adequate internal controls.”

Page 5 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

5

Advertisement

Here, Justice Engoron is laying out the laws he considered in his ruling beyond 63(12). The attorney general’s lawsuit included allegations of violations of falsifying business records, issuing false financial statements, insurance fraud and related conspiracy offenses.

Page 6 of undefined PDF document.
Page 7 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

7

Advertisement

For over 50 pages, Justice Engoron describes his conclusions about the testimony of all of the witnesses who spoke during the trial.

Page 8 of undefined PDF document.
Page 9 of undefined PDF document.
Page 10 of undefined PDF document.
Page 11 of undefined PDF document.
Page 12 of undefined PDF document.
Page 13 of undefined PDF document.
Page 14 of undefined PDF document.
Page 15 of undefined PDF document.
Page 16 of undefined PDF document.
Page 17 of undefined PDF document.
Page 18 of undefined PDF document.
Page 19 of undefined PDF document.
Page 20 of undefined PDF document.
Page 21 of undefined PDF document.
Page 22 of undefined PDF document.
Page 23 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

8

Advertisement

Justice Engoron discusses Mr. McConney’s important role in preparing Mr. Trump’s financial statements. The judge points out that Mr. McConney prepared all the valuations on the statements in consultation with Mr. Weisselberg.

Page 24 of undefined PDF document.
Page 25 of undefined PDF document.
Page 26 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

9

Advertisement

In his discussion of Mr. Weisselberg, Justice Engoron calls his testimony in the trial “intentionally evasive.” Justice Engoron then brings up Mr. Weisselberg’s separation agreement from the Trump Organization, which prohibited him from voluntarily cooperating with any entities “adverse” to the organization. Justice Engoron says that this renders Mr. Weisselberg’s testimony highly unreliable.

Page 27 of undefined PDF document.
Page 28 of undefined PDF document.
Page 29 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

10

Advertisement

When Donald Trump Jr. testified in court, he disavowed responsibility for his father’s financial statements despite serving as a trustee of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust while his father was president. But Justice Engoron specifically cites here that Donald Trump Jr. certified that he was responsible for the financial statements, and testified that he intended for the banks to rely on them and that the statements were “materially accurate.”

Page 30 of undefined PDF document.
Page 31 of undefined PDF document.
Page 32 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

11

Advertisement

During his testimony, Eric Trump, the Trump Organization’s de facto chief executive, initially denied knowing about his father’s financial statements until this case. As Justice Engoron points out here, Eric Trump eventually conceded to knowing about them as early as 2013. As a result, Justice Engoron calls Eric Trump’s credibility “severely damaged.”

Page 33 of undefined PDF document.
Page 34 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

12

Advertisement

Justice Engoron points to Mr. Trump’s testimony when he took the witness stand in November when Mr. Trump acknowledged that he helped put together his annual financial statements. Mr. Trump said he would see them and occasionally have suggestions.

Page 35 of undefined PDF document.
Page 36 of undefined PDF document.
Page 37 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

13

Advertisement

After four pages of describing Mr. Trump’s testimony, Justice Engoron says Mr. Trump rarely responded to the questions asked and frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches, which all “severely compromised his credibility.”

Page 38 of undefined PDF document.
Page 39 of undefined PDF document.
Page 40 of undefined PDF document.
Page 41 of undefined PDF document.
Page 42 of undefined PDF document.
Page 43 of undefined PDF document.
Page 44 of undefined PDF document.
Page 45 of undefined PDF document.
Page 46 of undefined PDF document.
Page 47 of undefined PDF document.
Page 48 of undefined PDF document.
Page 49 of undefined PDF document.
Page 50 of undefined PDF document.
Page 51 of undefined PDF document.
Page 52 of undefined PDF document.
Page 53 of undefined PDF document.
Page 54 of undefined PDF document.
Page 55 of undefined PDF document.
Page 56 of undefined PDF document.
Page 57 of undefined PDF document.
Page 58 of undefined PDF document.
Page 59 of undefined PDF document.
Page 60 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

14

Advertisement

For more than a dozen pages, Justice Engoron provides background on specific assets that Mr. Trump included in his annual financial statements.

Page 61 of undefined PDF document.
Page 62 of undefined PDF document.
Page 63 of undefined PDF document.
Page 64 of undefined PDF document.
Page 65 of undefined PDF document.
Page 66 of undefined PDF document.
Page 67 of undefined PDF document.
Page 68 of undefined PDF document.
Page 69 of undefined PDF document.
Page 70 of undefined PDF document.
Page 71 of undefined PDF document.
Page 72 of undefined PDF document.
Page 73 of undefined PDF document.
Page 74 of undefined PDF document.
Page 75 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

15

Advertisement

The judge is clarifying that Ms. James had to prove her claims by a “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning she had to demonstrate it was more likely than not that Mr. Trump and the co-defendants should be held liable. This is a lower standard than that of a criminal trial, which requires that evidence be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Page 76 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

16

Advertisement

During the trial, Mr. Trump and his legal team tried to shift the blame for any inaccuracies in his financial statements onto his outside accountants. But Justice Engoron criticizes that argument here.

Page 77 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

17

Advertisement

During the monthslong trial, Mr. Trump, his legal team and several witnesses stressed that real estate appraisals are an art, not a science. But here it’s clear Justice Engoron, while agreeing with that sentiment, also believes it’s deceptive when different appraisals rely on different assumptions.

Page 78 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

18

Advertisement

Justice Engoron is now going through the defendants one by one and articulating the evidence that shows each of their “intent to defraud,” which is required by the statute against falsifying business records. Notably, his first paragraph describing the former president’s intent provides examples including Mr. Trump’s awareness that his triplex apartment was not 30,000 square feet and his valuation of Mar-a-Lago as a single-family residence even though it was deeded as a social club.

Page 79 of undefined PDF document.
Page 80 of undefined PDF document.
Page 81 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

19

Advertisement

Among the defendants, Justice Engoron finds only Allen Weisselberg and Jeffrey McConney liable for insurance fraud. Here, he doesn’t provide an explanation for why the other defendants, including Mr. Trump and his adult sons, were not found liable, and he says that both Mr. Weisselberg and Mr. McConney made false representations to insurance companies about Mr. Trump’s financial statements.

20

While Mr. Trump and his adult sons were not found liable for insurance fraud, here Justice Engoron finds them liable for conspiracy to commit insurance fraud, explaining that they all “aided and abetted” the conspiracy to commit insurance fraud by falsifying business records.

Advertisement
Page 82 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

21

Justice Engoron here adopts the approximations of the attorney general’s expert witness Michiel McCarty, whom Justice Engoron says testified “reliably and convincingly,” and finds that the defendants’ fraud saved them over $168 million in interest.

Advertisement
Page 83 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

22

In finding that the defendants were able to purchase the Old Post Office in Washington, D.C., through their use of the fraudulent financial statements, Justice Engoron rules that the defendants’ proceeds from the sale of the post office in 2022 should be considered “ill-gotten gains.” He penalizes Donald Trump and his companies over $126 million, and Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump $4 million each, for this one property.

Advertisement
Page 84 of undefined PDF document.
Page 85 of undefined PDF document.
Page 86 of undefined PDF document.
Page 87 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

23

Justice Engoron blasts the defendants for failing to admit that they were wrong in their valuations — adding that “their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological.” He says that this inability to admit error makes him believe they will continue their fraudulent activities unless “judicially restrained.”

Advertisement
Page 88 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

25

Justice Engoron states that Judge Barbara Jones, who has been serving as an independent monitor at the Trump Organization since 2022, will continue in that role for at least three years. He clarifies that going forward, her role will be enhanced and she will review Trump Organization financial disclosures before they are submitted to any third party, to ensure that there are no material misstatements.

Advertisement
Page 89 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

Page 90 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

27

Advertisement

Justice Engoron lays out his bans against the defendants, ruling that Mr. Trump, Mr. Weisselberg and Mr. McConney cannot serve as officers or directors of any corporation or legal entity in New York for the next three years, and bans his sons Donald Trump Jr., and Eric Trump for two years from the same. He also prohibits Mr. Trump from applying for any loans from any New York banks for the next three years. The ruling goes further in the cases of Mr. Weisselberg and Mr. McConney, permanently barring them from serving in the financial control function of any New York business.

Page 91 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous

28

Advertisement

Justice Engoron also ordered that Mr. Trump and his sons pay the interest, pushing the penalty to $450 million, according to Ms. James.

Page 92 of undefined PDF document.
Advertisement

New York

$140,000 a Year in Manhattan: Pizza Is a Treat, and Old Toys Are New

Published

on

0,000 a Year in Manhattan: Pizza Is a Treat, and Old Toys Are New

How can people possibly afford to live in one of the most expensive cities on the planet? It’s a question New Yorkers hear a lot, often delivered with a mix of awe, pity and confusion.

We surveyed hundreds of New Yorkers about how they spend, splurge and save. We found that many people — rich, poor or somewhere in between — live life as a series of small calculations that add up to one big question: What makes living in New York worth it?

Advertisement

Kerry McAuliffe weighs that question every time she looks up the cost of summer camp for one of her three children or opens a stuffed closet in her Morningside Heights apartment, close to Columbia University in Manhattan, and has a basketball fall on her head.

“We’re in a place where it’s very tight,” Ms. McAuliffe said. Her family of five lives on $140,000 a year.

Advertisement

Ms. McAuliffe and her husband both grew up in suburbs outside New York City, and say they are dedicated to staying in the city long term. Anna Watts for The New York Times

Advertisement

Their housing solution: become the super

The family’s monthly rent — $2,700 for their three-bedroom apartment — is their biggest expense, as it is for most New Yorkers. But they have a hack to make their housing more affordable: Ms. McAuliffe’s husband, Jake Kassman, is the superintendent for their building and the one next door.

Advertisement

The couple’s three children are 7, 3 and 1. For now, at least, they all happily eat broccoli. Anna Watts for The New York Times

He took on the super job a few years ago, after the couple’s first child was born and the family realized they wouldn’t be able to live only on Mr. Kassman’s roughly $110,000 salary as an M.R.I. technician at Columbia University’s medical center. Ms. McAuliffe had left her job in education around the same time, because the cost of child care would have canceled out her paycheck.

Advertisement

There are perks: The family now takes in an extra $30,000 or so a year, including a few months of free rent, and their landlord recently let them knock down a wall to take over an extra bedroom in a vacant unit next door.

‘Someone gets financial aid. Why not you?’

Advertisement

Ms. McAuliffe and Mr. Kassman spend much of their free time plotting how to provide their children with as many opportunities as they can, while weighing the cost of school and activities.

The family had never seriously considered private school until a chance meeting on a playground a few years ago. Ms. McAuliffe was speaking with a neighbor who encouraged her to apply for financial aid, asking: “Someone gets financial aid. Why not you?”

The family applied to the nearby Cathedral School, which costs about $65,000 a year, and received a package that would cover more than half the cost for their daughter.

Advertisement

The couple’s eldest has started to ask about the after-school activities and camps that many of her friends go to. The couple splurged on a week of theater camp, which cost $1,000, and a season of swim team at the local pool, which runs $800, for her.

But Ms. McAuliffe feels a pang of guilt whenever she signs her daughter up for an activity, because she can’t afford classes for the younger children, both boys.

Advertisement

“One day we’ll have to do a reckoning of where the funds go,” she said. “My son is like, ‘Can I do swim team?’ And I’m like, ‘We’ll see.’”

They cut back on babysitting but splurge for pizza night

Since nearly all of the family’s budget goes to rent and education, Ms. McAuliffe and Mr. Kassman have made peace with the fact that the frequent nights out and elaborate birthday parties that other families can afford are not part of their lives.

Advertisement

The couple gets a babysitter only about three times a year, so they can go out to dinner for each of their birthdays and their anniversary. They know it would be good for them to go out on their own more. But, Ms. McAuliffe said, “I’m trying to come to terms with the idea that this is a chapter in life, and hopefully we’ll be able to grow old together and talk about those things later.”

The family’s weekly treat is Friday night pizza delivery, which usually costs $25.

Advertisement

For the rest of the week, Ms. McAuliffe tries to keep the weekly grocery bill to about $300. She relies on quesadillas and pasta to feed the whole family, and is relieved that all three kids happily eat broccoli. But she worries about how much she’ll have to stock her fridge once she has two preteen boys in the house.

On weekends, the family mostly sticks to the city’s bounty of free parks and playgrounds.

The couple has a car, which they use to go visit family on Long Island. They sometimes take day trips upstate, to a farm or a hike, but usually drive home at night to avoid paying for an Airbnb. Just the cost of gas, an activity and a meal for the day usually runs them about $300.

Advertisement

Their Christmas strategy: Old toys are new

For Christmas, Ms. McAuliffe wrapped the open puzzles and toys that her oldest child had grown out of to make them look like new gifts for her younger children.

Advertisement

Instead of birthday parties where the whole class is invited, Ms. McAuliffe has each of her children pick a special activity, like a trip to the Statue of Liberty, that they can attend with a friend.

The family’s sacrosanct splurge is a short summer vacation, usually four nights, somewhere within driving distance of the city, which typically costs about $3,000.

Advertisement

That tradition helps the couple feel better about skipping so much of what their peers can afford. None of her children has ever been on an airplane, and she doesn’t expect that to change soon.

Ms. McAuliffe recently spoke with a friend who grew up in New York but left the city because of the cost of living. He asked her why she was staying, when life could be so much easier somewhere else.

“I just like being in New York,” Ms. McAuliffe said. “There’s so much to do the second you step outside your door.”

Advertisement

We want to hear from you about how you afford life in one of the most expensive cities in the world. We’re looking to speak with people of all income ranges, with all kinds of living situations and professions.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

New York

Video: Deer Sets Off Burglar Alarm in a New York Bank

Published

on

Video: Deer Sets Off Burglar Alarm in a New York Bank

new video loaded: Deer Sets Off Burglar Alarm in a New York Bank

Police officers on Long Island responded to an alarm at a bank to find that the culprit was a deer that had crashed through a window.
Advertisement

By Axel Boada

January 23, 2026

Watch Today’s Videos

    Armed Robbers Steal At Least $110,000 Worth of Pokémon Cards

    0:58

    Runaway Horse Charges Through Busy N.Y.C. Intersection

    0:40

    New York City Nurses Go on Strike

    1:32

    Advertisement
    Hochul and Mamdani Announce Plan for Universal Child Care

    1:56

    Mamdani Creates Office of Mass Engagement

    1:23

    ‘I Will Govern as a Democratic Socialist,’ Mamdani Says at Inauguration

    2:15

Video ›

Today’s Videos

Advertisement

U.S.

Politics

Immigration

NY Region

Science

Advertisement

Business

Culture

Books

Wellness

World

Advertisement

Africa

Americas

Asia

South Asia

Donald Trump

Advertisement

Middle East Crisis

Russia-Ukraine Crisis

Visual Investigations

Opinion Video

Advertisement

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Continue Reading

New York

Video: Armed Robbers Steal At Least $110,000 Worth of Pokémon Cards

Published

on

Video: Armed Robbers Steal At Least 0,000 Worth of Pokémon Cards

new video loaded: Armed Robbers Steal At Least $110,000 Worth of Pokémon Cards

Three men stole at least $110,00 worth of Pokémon cards from a shop in Lower Manhattan on Wednesday. The thieves held customers at gun point, smashed display cases and took money from the cash register. One of the items stolen was a first-edition Charizard card worth about $15,000, according to the store’s owner.

By Jamie Leventhal and Jorge Mitssunaga

January 17, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending