Donald Trump Can Reverse Judge Engoron's Ruling—Here's How

Donald Trump may be able to overturn the $355 million fine imposed on him in a fraud trial, a New York attorney has said.

Litigation attorney, Colleen Kerwick, told Newsweek that Judge Arthur Engoron was trying to "sidestep" the need to apply all the elements of fraud, as there was no real victim in the case.

Newsweek sought email comment from Engoron's office on Monday.

New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Trump, his two adult sons Donald Jr. and Eric, The Trump Organization and two firm executives, Allen Weisselberg and Jeff McConney, in September 2022. Engoron, who oversaw the trial, found that Trump inflated his assets to get more favorable business loans. From late last year into early January, a trial was held to determine how much the former president and his associates would pay in damages.

On Friday, Engoron ruled that Trump will have to pay roughly $355 million in penalties. Trump, along with Weisselberg and McConney, will also be barred from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in the state for three years. Donald Jr. and Eric Trump were ordered to each pay more than $4 million and were banned from doing business in the state for two years.

"The court went to criminal statutes and case law, ordinarily applied under a 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard, in an effort to sidestep the need for damages as an essential element of fraud," Kerwick said.

Kerwick said Judge Engoron's judgment makes clear that Trump always made his loan repayments, so there was no real victim.

"The decision concedes that 'despite the false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants have made all required payments on time.'"

"The only conceivable damages are the bank's hypothetical application of [different] interest rates than would have been applied if the assets were more conservatively evaluated," she said.

Kerwick added that it is not clear that Trump's inflation of his assets led to a lower interest rate, as the banks may have applied the lower interest rate simply to keep his business.

"The damages were largely punitive damages for the defendant's 'lack of contrition,'" she said.

Kerwick also said that Trump has grounds to appeal the standard of law that was applied in the case.

"Civil fraud cases have a 'clear and convincing evidence' standard while the court in Trump's case applied the lower 'preponderance of the evidence' standard," she said, and noted that the court cited a car accident case as authority for doing so.

Trump, the current GOP frontrunner in the 2024 presidential election, has maintained his innocence and has said he will appeal the decision.

Professor Greg Germain of Syracuse University College of Law agreed that there was never a strong case for saying there was a victim in Trump's fraud case.

"The evidence of reasonable reliance [on Trump's financial statements] by the 'victims' is very weak' and may be grounds of appeal," Germain told Newsweek.