Donald the Orange and Family Sued in NY

[DeplorableInfidel]

I already quoted you the law

Whether it’s civil or criminal, the elements of fraud require not just a “false” statement. It requires also that someone be deceived by the false statement. (And it must be a false statement not just an inaccurate or merely mistaken statement.). In short, there must be a victim.

In this AG Letitia James case against Trump, the plaintiff can point to no victim. There were no victims. The case was decided erroneously by the judge from the outset. Some folks may not like this but I’ll stand by it and await the outcome (not of the “trial”) of appellate process. I predict that the verdict and “judgment” are going to be nullified on appeal.

Lies you are lapping up from your Trumposphere, no surprise there as that is all they have these days:

No. No lies. Elements. And it happens to be true.

Executive Law § 63(12) now reads as follows: Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply… for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper. The word “fraud” or “fraudulent” as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term “persistent fraud” or “illegality” as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term “repeated” as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.

Nothing about a "victim". But even then, ex-ante the banks were a defacto victim by agreeing to give a loan at more favorable terms than otherwise but for the fraudulent financial statements they were provided. They were subject to greater risk than they realized and got lower profits than they would've gotten had they had correct, nonfraudulent information. The interest amounts saved on these more favorable loan terms were ill gotten gains that have to be paid back for breaking this law regardless of whether there is a "victim".

Wrong. If you look at the elements you will see that (although it doesn’t use the word “victim”) it absolutely does contemplate that there be a victim.

I will be happy to explain it all in a follow up post.

Does this mean that a higher court will absolutely agree with my view? Of course not. But I tell you this much: there is an excellent chance that somewhere along the line, a court is going to agree.

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

I already quoted you the law. You are just plain wrong. The purpose of this law was to prevent ill gotten gains from "any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions.", when done repeatedly. Does not require a victim, as you are falsely asserting.

If you want to provide a legal source that addressing this law directly: Executive Law § 63(12), that claims to require a victim, I will listen, but stick to this specifically as this is the law that holds for this case.

And, as I already pointed out, the banks were victims. They charged him a lower rate than they would have without the fraudulent info. I noticed you didn't even attempt to address that.

Outing the law isn’t the same as grasping what it actually says and means.

As indicated, I will come back to provide support for the fact that the law does (contrary to the judge and you) require that there must be a victim. And, here, there is no “victim.”

 

[Elixir]

A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception.

Right. And a decades-long PATTERN of deception is not a mistaken estimate. You were obviously not present for all the testimony.

As Judge Angoran correctly observed:

On the reaction of Trump and his adult sons:
“Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin. Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways. Instead, they adopt a ‘See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ posture that the evidence belies.”

On being confronted with their misdeeds:
“In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements. When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants’ fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences.”

On the severity of the penalty:
“In considering the need for ongoing injunctive relief, this Court is mindful that this action is not the first time the Trump Organization or its related entities has been found to have engaged in corporate malfeasance. Of course, the more evidence there is of defendants’ ongoing propensity to engage in fraud, the more need there is for the Court to impose stricter injunctive relief. This is not defendants’ first rodeo.”

On Trump as a witness:
“Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial. His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.”

@DeplorableInfidel you would do well to read the transcripts, and ferret out any part where you feel that the judge's findings of fact were in error. Every legal mind I know has expressed confidence that this case was conducted very conservatively with the inevitable appeal (delay) in mind, and is quite airtight. I wonder where you got the idea that the judge was in error.

Oh, wait.... no I don't. It's pretty apparent where you got that notion.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception.

Right. And a decades-long PATTERN of deception is not a mistaken estimate. You were obviously not present for all the testimony.

As Judge Angoran correctly observed:

Judge Engoran did not “correctly” observe the things he claimed. He was just an overly partisan hack.

On the reaction of Trump and his adult sons:
“Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin. Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways. Instead, they adopt a ‘See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ posture that the evidence belies.”

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

On being confronted with their misdeeds:
“In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements. When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants’ fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences.”

The claim that Trump and company submitted “blatantly false” data is itself false. Part of the judge’s partisan bias was thereby revealed.

On the severity of the penalty:
“In considering the need for ongoing injunctive relief, this Court is mindful that this action is not the first time the Trump Organization or its related entities has been found to have engaged in corporate malfeasance. Of course, the more evidence there is of defendants’ ongoing propensity to engage in fraud, the more need there is for the Court to impose stricter injunctive relief. This is not defendants’ first rodeo.”

Any claimed prior “findings” of corporate “malfeasance” have nothing to do with whether (or not) he and the company engaged in any in this matter.

On Trump as a witness:
“Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial. His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.”

Nonsense. President Trump addressed matters very pertinent to what he was being subjected to. The judge didn’t want any of it mentioned. No surprise there.

I expect this abortion of a verdict and judgment to be overturned largely on the basis of some of what Trump was addressing. The judge perhaps didn’t want those complaints preserved on the future appellate record.

@DeplorableInfidel you would do well to read the transcripts, and ferret out any part where you feel that the judge's findings of fact were in error. Every legal mind I know has expressed confidence that this case was conducted very conservatively with the inevitable appeal (delay) in mind, and is quite airtight. I wonder where you got the idea that the judge was in error.

Oh, wait.... no I don't. It's pretty apparent where you got that notion.

You are in error having been misled not just by the AG and the biased judge but by the sloppy media misreporting the alleged “facts.”

In the immortal words of Ahnold: I’ll be back.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

Trump over valued for banks and under valued for taxing authorities. The people of New York were certainly victims of his fraud.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective, anyway. Even a formal appraisal is not compelling evidence of “value.” Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

 

[Elixir]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument, it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

Trump over valued for banks and under valued for taxing authorities. The people of New York were certainly victims of his fraud.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective, anyway. Even a formal appraisal is not compelling evidence of “value.” Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

?? Where do you get this? Lying on a PFS is fraud. There are many people in jail today due to committing fraud on bank statements. When I was a banker, I had a customer who inflated the value of her receivables in order to get a larger LOC. She served time. This is no different. Trump inflated the value of his home in order to get better terms with his banker. It's fraud all day long...

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

An empty claim. Not litigated.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument,

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Denial of claims made by the plaintiff puts the plaintiff to her proof. She couldn’t achieve that in reality because there was no fraud absent a victim and there were non victims.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

It is judge Engoran. Not Angolan. For future reference.

And he did misstate by a massive margin the alleged value of Mar A Lago.

I have bothered to quote the actual law.

Your denials don’t make that go away.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

An empty claim. Not litigated.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument,

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Denial of claims made by the plaintiff puts the plaintiff to her proof. She couldn’t achieve that in reality because there was no fraud absent a victim and there were non victims.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

It is judge Engoran. Not Angolan. For future reference.

And he did misstate by a massive margin the alleged value of Mar A Lago.

I have bothered to quote the actual law.

Your denials don’t make that go away.

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

An empty claim. Not litigated.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument,

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Denial of claims made by the plaintiff puts the plaintiff to her proof. She couldn’t achieve that in reality because there was no fraud absent a victim and there were non victims.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

It is judge Engoran. Not Angolan. For future reference.

And he did misstate by a massive margin the alleged value of Mar A Lago.

I have bothered to quote the actual law.

Your denials don’t make that go away.

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

No bank made any such complaint.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

An empty claim. Not litigated.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument,

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Denial of claims made by the plaintiff puts the plaintiff to her proof. She couldn’t achieve that in reality because there was no fraud absent a victim and there were non victims.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

It is judge Engoran. Not Angolan. For future reference.

And he did misstate by a massive margin the alleged value of Mar A Lago.

I have bothered to quote the actual law.

Your denials don’t make that go away.

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

No bank made any such complaint.

NY law does not require them to do so. Use some common sense. Do you honestly think that a person claiming 2 billion dollars in net worth would get the same deal from a bank as someone claiming 4 billion in net worth? If you do, you're being very naive.

 

[Shadowy Man]

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

No bank made any such complaint.

so the state has no interest in the legal execution of business practices under its purview?

It wasn’t a loan between private citizens, but business entities operating with license from the state, right?

 

[Elixir]

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

Right, the claims that Trump is a career criminal who has been bilking people and governments for his entire life, is an empty claim.
Despite numerous people being aware of that FACT, it has not been litigated as such.
But the claims in the complaints against him in the NY case HAVE been litigated and Trump has been found liable.
But you flat-out deny it, based on your own blue sky counterfactual assertions of the law and the evidence, so what difference would it make if what I added WAS litigated - you'd just deny that too (even though I know for a fact he is guilty AF).
Do you also deny his history of fraud, his so-called charity, his fake university and all his other failed frauds?

 

[Elixir]

so the state has no interest in the legal execution of business practices under its purview?

It wasn’t a loan between private citizens, but business entities operating with license from the state, right?

I don't think facts matter much more to Deplo than they do to Trump. "Nope" seems to be sufficient for him to dismiss any notion that Trump is anything but a victim, just as Trump says. I hope he (Deplo) sticks around - I can't wait to hear about how all 91 felony counts were faked and the Grand Juries fooled into recommending his indictment, and how the trial juries were all biased and blah blah blah.

 

[Swammerdami]

IIUC, donations cannot be used to pay a judgement. Trumplickers can send him money to pay his lawyers, but NOT to pay fines or civil judgments. (But I don't know how this could be enforced -- cheating it seems likely. There's already a GoFundMe page for the $355 million. Some are contributing $5 just so they can post anti-Trump comments!)

Is there a deadline for filing an appeal? Expect Trump to delay payment without actually filing an appeal.

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

Two points:
(1) Deception WAS deliberate. Perhaps you did not hear the same evidence Judge Engoron did.
(2) Even if he made good on the fraudulently-acquired loans, that doesn't mean there was no victim. The banks lost out on the extra interest they would have demanded had there been no fraud.

 

[Elixir]

Is there a deadline for filing an appeal? Expect Trump to delay payment without actually filing an appeal.

"The deadline for filing an appeal does not start to run unless you are served with a copy of the Order or Judgment with Notice of Entry. If that happens, you only have 30 days to file your Notice of Appeal, 35 days if you are served by mail! See CPLR 5513.Oct 19, 2018

Starting an Appeal | NY CourtHelp​

New York State Unified Court System (.gov)"

He will need to use the 30 days to come up with the cash so he can post the bond in order to file an appeal, so no funny business about avoiding payment.

 

[Elixir]

Judge Engoran did not “correctly” observe the things he claimed. He was just an overly partisan hack.

Sez you. "Nope" is not an argument. The only partisan hack who has revealed themselves as such, is the Loose Cannon in FL, helping him delay his trial on the obvious crimes of illegally retaining classified documents, defying a subpoena and lying to the FBI.

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

More "nope".

The claim that Trump and company submitted “blatantly false” data is itself false.

THAT is blatantly false. 10≠30. Again, blue sky assertions (e.g. "nope") are not arguments.

Any claimed prior “findings” of corporate “malfeasance” have nothing to do with whether (or not) he and the company engaged in any in this matter.

Ignorant BS. A pattern of behavior can be evidence, regardless of your uninformed opinion.

President Trump addressed matters very pertinent to what he was being subjected to.

Uh, he is citizen Trump. (Calling him president might even increase his liability in other cases, where as an "officer of the United States who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution", he may go down for insurrection, or even treason.)
The only matter he showed up to testify about (his liability) had already been decided in a previous trial where he had declined to show up. That's why the judge shut him up when he deviated from the instructions he was given. You should know that... the only thing at issue in this case was the amount.

I expect this abortion of a verdict and judgment to be overturned

OH GAAAAWD, I wish they allowed betting around here. The most you (or Trump) can hope for is a downward adjustment of the amount. As far as the finding of liability? Sorry dude, that horse has left the barn.

 

[Axulus]

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

Trump over valued for banks and under valued for taxing authorities. The people of New York were certainly victims of his fraud.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective, anyway. Even a formal appraisal is not compelling evidence of “value.” Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

You clearly didn't follow the case:

They ignored actual independent appraisals in some cases and used their own fraudulant numbers instead. They lied to the accountants claiming the values came from independent appraisals. They used blantantly fraudulant methods to justify the values. Also, saying your penthouse is 30,000 sq ft when it is actually 10,000 sq ft, and then tripiling it's value based on this fake size, when proof was provided they knew the actual size is not "subjective".

And regarding Mar-a-lago, their claimed value was based on what it could be worth if it was redeveloped or used as a private home. And yet this could not be done, redeveloped or used in this way, based on an agreement with the city where a deed restriction was imposed in order to get all the licenses and permits to be used as a private social club and, more importantly, be taxed as one by the city at an insanely low value. They ignored this deed restriction in the valuation to inflate the value. That is fraud.

I used to do business valuations so I am well aware of the subjective nature of valuations. There are some judgment calls you can make and then there is blantantly just making shit up. They blantantly made shit up, using illegitimate methods that are not accepted when determining the value, and then, on top of that, using false assumptions (like inaccurate size or ignoring essential facts), because they lead to large inaccuracies.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

Of course. That's why he's been found liable. He has been doing unethical, wrong things for decades.

An empty claim. Not litigated.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective,

"Nope" is not an argument,

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

it is exactly what Judge Angoron busted Trump's team for. Denial of facts is not a defense.

Denial of claims made by the plaintiff puts the plaintiff to her proof. She couldn’t achieve that in reality because there was no fraud absent a victim and there were non victims.

Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

He didn't. Nor did he fail to grasp the difference between Trump's 10,000 sq ft apartment and the 30,000 sq ft he repeatedly claimed.
Dude, you are in denial, and sounding just like Alina Habba the inflatable lawyer. Axulus was even kind enogh to quote the law to you for your own education, and you just "nuh-uh", as if you re-wrote the law with your magic utterance.

It is judge Engoran. Not Angolan. For future reference.

And he did misstate by a massive margin the alleged value of Mar A Lago.

I have bothered to quote the actual law.

Your denials don’t make that go away.

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

No bank made any such complaint.

NY law does not require them to do so. Use some common sense. Do you honestly think that a person claiming 2 billion dollars in net worth would get the same deal from a bank as someone claiming 4 billion in net worth? If you do, you're being very naive.

You are making claims without any support.

NY law is as I reported it. There must be a victim. No victim; no fraud. No bank complained (before or during trial). Why not? Because no bank was victimized.

Your comparison of a person claiming $2 billion in wealth vs a person claiming $4 billion in wealth is absolutely of no consequence. After exercising any due diligence, any bank able to offer a loan would be just as happy to do so, either way.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

The victims in this case was his bank. Banks determine their interest rates and fees based on competition and risk. An inflated PFS, lowers the perceived risk of a loan, allowing a bank to offer a lower interest rate. Loans with very little risk (CD secured loan for example) offer the lowest rates; banks charge rates and fees for higher risk loans.

No bank made any such complaint.

so the state has no interest in the legal execution of business practices under its purview?

They can be as interested as they wish. But absent a legal wrong, they have no say in it. Nor should they.

It wasn’t a loan between private citizens, but business entities operating with license from the state, right?

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

True. But your empty claim is also not an argument.

Right, the claims that Trump is a career criminal who has been bilking people and governments for his entire life, is an empty claim.
Despite numerous people being aware of that FACT, it has not been litigated as such.
But the claims in the complaints against him in the NY case HAVE been litigated and Trump has been found liable.

A claim is just a claim. It is (in and of itself) of no value. Numerous such complaints is akin to multiplying by zero. It still yields nothing.

Yes. This AG complaint was litigated. Yes Trump and company were “found” liable. But that’s not the question. The question is whether he was properly found liable. And the answer to that turns no just in the evidence but also in the elements. There’s the rub. None of the evidence (alone of in combination) supports each of the elements.
Thus, this verdict and judgment should be reversed on appeal.

But you flat-out deny it, based on your own blue sky counterfactual assertions of the law and the evidence, so what difference would it make if what I added WAS litigated - you'd just deny that too (even though I know for a fact he is guilty AF).
Do you also deny his history of fraud, his so-called charity, his fake university and all his other failed frauds?

Except, of course, you’re wrong. It’s not at all my own “blue sky.” I noted several examples of the required legal elements. What you’re trying to do (but failing at) is to dispute that I have properly referenced the requisite legal elements of the tort or torts in question.

If Joe Blow has a history of being sued for some tort (let’s stick with fraud cases). That fact might (under specific circumstances) have some evidentiary value for a new fraud case at trial. Then again, it might not. It depends on the circumstances and why the evidence of prior fraud cases is offered into evidence.

But standing alone, evidence of prior frauds isn’t generally relevant to the question of whether this case involves any fraud at all.