New York Civil Business Fraud: People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, et al.

Last updated: 21 November 2025

Status: Fraud finding affirmed on appeal (21 August 2025); approximately $500m monetary penalty voided as excessive under the Eighth Amendment. Certain non-monetary remedies, including monitoring and business restrictions, remain in place in some form, subject to further proceedings and higher-court review.

Summary

This page summarises New York’s civil business fraud case brought by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) against Donald J. Trump, several of his adult children, and Trump Organization entities. The suit alleged that for years they submitted inflated asset valuations in statements of financial condition to secure more favourable loan and insurance terms, in violation of Executive Law § 63(12).

Following a bench trial in New York Supreme Court (Justice Arthur F. Engoron) from October 2023 to January 2024, the court found persistent fraud and ordered both monetary and non-monetary remedies. The financial judgment, including interest, approached half a billion dollars and was coupled with restrictions on Trump and his companies’ ability to do business in New York, alongside continued oversight by an independent monitor.

On 21 August 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department largely upheld the liability findings but vacated the nearly $500m financial penalty as an excessive fine. The panel left in place significant non-monetary relief, including monitoring and certain corporate restrictions, while remanding aspects of the remedy to the trial court for administration in line with the appellate mandate. Both the Attorney General and Trump’s legal team have signalled further appeals focused on remedies and the scope of relief.

Key outcomes at a glance

• Liability:
  The Appellate Division affirmed that Trump, related individuals, and entities are liable for civil fraud under Executive Law § 63(12), upholding findings of persistent misrepresentation in financial statements used with lenders and insurers.

• Monetary penalty:
  A disgorgement-based financial judgment that had grown to roughly $500m with interest was vacated as an “excessive” fine that violated constitutional limits. The appeals court left open the possibility of a more proportionate monetary remedy in future proceedings.

• Non-monetary remedies:
  Injunctive measures such as continued monitoring of the Trump Organization and limitations on Trump and some of his sons holding certain corporate leadership positions in New York or seeking specified loans remain in place, although details are subject to ongoing trial-level administration.

• Next steps:
  The New York Attorney General has sought review by the state’s highest court to reinstate the monetary penalty, while Trump is pursuing relief from remaining restrictions. Further appellate activity therefore centres on the scope and proportionality of the remedies rather than the underlying fraud finding.

Timeline

• 2019–2022 – Investigation and complaint:
  The OAG conducted a multi-year investigation into Trump Organization valuations and, in September 2022, filed a civil complaint under Executive Law § 63(12) alleging a pattern of inflated asset values and misleading statements of financial condition.

• October 2023 – January 2024 – Bench trial:
  A non-jury trial took place in New York Supreme Court before Justice Engoron. Evidence included years of internal Trump Organization records, expert testimony on valuation practices, and testimony from Trump family members and executives.

• February 2024 – Liability and remedies:
  The trial court entered judgment finding that Trump and co-defendants engaged in persistent fraud. The court ordered disgorgement in the mid–$300m range, which with interest approached $500m, and imposed business restrictions and continued monitoring over corporate operations.

• March–April 2024 – Bond and interim stays:
  Pending appeal, the Appellate Division reduced the required appeal bond and temporarily paused some of the most restrictive business bans, allowing Trump to post a lower bond while keeping the court-appointed monitor in place.

• 21 August 2025 – Appellate Division decision:
  The First Department issued its decision in People v. Trump, affirming liability but voiding the disgorgement award as an excessive fine. The panel left the structure of injunctive relief largely intact, subject to adjustment, and remanded for proceedings consistent with its opinion.

• September 2025 – Further appellate steps:
  The Attorney General petitioned New York’s Court of Appeals to reinstate the monetary penalty, while Trump’s counsel continued to challenge remaining business restrictions, signalling that the appellate phase is ongoing despite the major modification to the judgment.

Legal background and key issues

The case was brought under New York Executive Law § 63(12), a statute that gives the Attorney General broad authority to pursue “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts” and “persistent fraud” in business. Courts interpreting this provision have stressed its focus on patterns of conduct and its relatively flexible definition of fraud, which can encompass misleading omissions and practices that create an atmosphere conducive to deception, even without traditional elements like reliance and damages being proved in the same way as in a private lawsuit.

In this case, the OAG alleged that annual statements of financial condition overstated Trump’s net worth by billions of dollars through methods such as:

• Applying favourable assumptions about future development or brand value without disclosure

• Using metrics that diverged from common appraisal practices

• Valuing certain properties as if unrestricted or fully developed when they were not

The trial court accepted much of this framework, finding that the statements were materially misleading and that they were used repeatedly in dealings with banks and insurers. The appeals court did not disturb the core finding that these practices amounted to civil fraud under the statute.

Orders and remedies

Monetary judgment

Justice Engoron ordered disgorgement in the mid–$300m range, which, with pre- and post-judgment interest, was widely reported as exceeding $450m and growing towards approximately $500m by the time of appeal.

The Appellate Division accepted that courts may impose substantial financial remedies for persistent fraud, but held that this particular judgment, given the facts and the absence of proven lender losses, crossed the line into an unconstitutional excessive fine. The panel therefore vacated the disgorgement award, while leaving open the question of whether a narrower financial remedy might be crafted in future proceedings.

Non-monetary injunctive relief

The trial court also ordered a range of non-monetary measures, including:

• Oversight of Trump Organization entities by a court-appointed independent monitor

• Restrictions on Trump and some of his sons serving as officers or directors of New York corporations for a defined period

• Limits on seeking certain loans or financing from institutions regulated in New York without enhanced disclosure and monitoring

Some of these provisions were stayed in part while the appeal was pending. The appeals court ultimately allowed a significant portion of the injunctive framework to continue, emphasising the legitimacy of prospective measures designed to prevent future misconduct, even as it curtailed the financial component.

Appellate ruling and what remains in force

In People v. Trump, 2025 NY Slip Op 04756, the First Department unanimously agreed that the record supported a finding of fraud but divided sharply over the appropriate consequences. The opinion concluded that:

• The OAG was within its authority to bring the case under Executive Law § 63(12).

• The evidence showed a long-running pattern of inflated valuations and misleading financial statements.

• The nearly half-billion-dollar disgorgement award was disproportionate and violated the Eighth Amendment’s bar on excessive fines.

As of late October 2025:

• Liability for civil fraud stands. The appellate court’s decision leaves intact the determination that Trump and certain entities engaged in civil fraud.

• Financial penalties are in flux. The original disgorgement judgment has been vacated. The Attorney General is asking the New York Court of Appeals to reinstate it or approve a substantial monetary remedy, while Trump seeks to further limit or nullify financial exposure.

• Prospective remedies continue. Monitoring and corporate-governance restrictions remain operative in some form, although the exact contours are being recalibrated at the trial level under the appellate mandate and could be further modified by higher courts.

Scope, context, and neutrality

This page focuses on the New York civil business fraud case and does not attempt to catalogue every legal or political dispute involving Donald J. Trump. It distinguishes between:

• Allegations made by investigators or in pleadings

• Findings by a trial court after an evidentiary hearing

• Modifications made by appellate courts

The proceeding is civil, not criminal: no prison sentence is at issue, and the remedies centre on financial and corporate-governance measures. Where commentary describes the case as politically motivated or, conversely, as a straightforward application of fraud law, this page reports that such views exist without endorsing them. The aim is to provide a clear, neutral reference that accurately reflects the state of the litigation as of 25 October 2025 and can be updated as higher courts rule on pending appeals.

Sources

• New York State Courts – Appellate Division, First Department, People v. Trump, 2025 NY Slip Op 04756 (Decision and Order, 21 Aug 2025)

• Justia — People v. Trump, 2025 NY Slip Op 04756 (Appellate Division, First Department)

• New York Attorney General — Statement on First Department Opinion Affirming Donald Trump Is Liable for Fraud (21 Aug 2025)

• Reuters — “In huge win for Trump, court throws out half-billion-dollar fraud penalty but preserves case” (21 Aug 2025)

• PBS NewsHour — “Trump’s massive civil fraud penalty for exaggerating financial statements is thrown out by appeals court” (21 Aug 2025)

• Associated Press via AP News — “New York attorney general asks court to reinstate President Trump’s massive civil fraud penalty” (4 Sept 2025)

• Wikipedia — “New York business fraud lawsuit against the Trump Organization” (overview of investigation, trial, and appeal)

Return to Homepage
Felonotus Homepage

Return to Sexual Assault Hub
Sexual Assault Hub