A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

12 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Wait a minute. Are you saying that the state has no interest in my stating my home’s value at $10 million for the purposes of a loan?

Just for purposes of clarification, you as an individual applying for a mortgage or related loan secured by real property, are subject to conventional bank fraud statutes and likely would be indicted by the feds for lying in a loan application, especially by submitting phony financial statements.

These commercial lending scenarios are a bit different in that there's not a "standard loan application" package, the lenders are more sophisticated, ostensibly, than home mortgage lenders, etc.  So, this is why Trump hasn't been charged with federal bank fraud.

There are some counts in James' petition that attempt to allege this type of more conventional fraud:  Trump falsified, bank relied, bank damaged.  James didn't move for summary judgment on these counts, and, reading between the lines, even Engoron may be skeptical of the viability of these counts, depending on proof at trial.

Section 63(12) encompasses more than just 'bank fraud" or common-law fraud.  In that sense, it is somewhat unusual and I'm not sure analogizing it to conventional bank fraud or common-law fraud is particularly useful.  In fact, Trump and his lawyers continue to attempt to analyze/analogize the case to common-law or bank fraud despite the pretty clear law established by New York courts that 63(12) is much broader than that.

Edited September 27, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[DalTxHornFan 3,084]

I appreciate your comments, Twice.  I'm guessing that most of the time that sort of approach is used against some sort of Ponzi scheme or other situations where "civilians" or other consumers have made complaints to the AG seeking relief.

I also note that this ruling was simply made upon the pleadings.  It would appear that there is currently no evidence before the court, certainly none that has been subjected to cross examination or rebuttal.

[MissingInAction 24,765]

[High Plains Drifter 10,970]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

No monetary penalty has been assessed, so there's no "receivership for the benefit of creditors" here to satisfy that penalty.  And, in the usual course of things, whatever monetary penalty is involved subsequently will first be subject to voluntary payment before any extreme creditor remedies are invoked (forced sales of assets, etc.).

 

 

...yet.

Right?

Monetary penalties coming forthwith, in a separate ruling/hearing/whatever the fuck, right?

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,537]

We're literally only a decade and a half away from a financial crisis with banking and real estate at it's epicenter and only averted complete catastrophe due to government action, and already people are actually suggesting government should have no interest in these matters. 

[TexasHooch 5,117]

My favorite scene of all time...

 

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

3 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

I appreciate your comments, Twice.  I'm guessing that most of the time that sort of approach is used against some sort of Ponzi scheme or other situations where "civilians" or other consumers have made complaints to the AG seeking relief.

I also note that this ruling was simply made upon the pleadings.  It would appear that there is currently no evidence before the court, certainly none that has been subjected to cross examination or rebuttal.

It was on summary judgment, so a pretty extensive paper record, hundreds of exhibits.  

[Pig Bellmont 8,679]

7 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

I also note that this ruling was simply made upon the pleadings.  It would appear that there is currently no evidence before the court, certainly none that has been subjected to cross examination or rebuttal.

My civil procedure prof is rolling in his grave 

[DalTxHornFan 3,084]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

It was on summary judgment, so a pretty extensive paper record, hundreds of exhibits.  

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

[YGIFS 19,449]

17 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Here's the relevant provision of NY law, NY Exec. Law S. 63(12):

12. 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, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, 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   3 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.

In connection with any such application, the attorney general is authorized to take proof and make a determination of the relevant facts and to issue subpoenas in accordance with the civil practice law and rules.  Such authorization shall not abate or terminate by reason of any action or proceeding brought by the attorney general under this section.

Trump may not get a library or airport or high school named after him, but in one more generation, 2L students will refer to this as "Donald's Law."  Expect the first co-conspirator at a lending institution to flip on him in October.  "That's my advice anyway, Mr. Trump.  Don't do it.  'Cause underwriting is a serious crime." /whiteheat

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

3 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

...yet.

Right?

Monetary penalties coming forthwith, in a separate ruling/hearing/whatever the fuck, right?

 

There are issues remaining for trial, one of which is the amount of penalty.  Trial presumably starts Monday.

Incidentally, the trial judge's ruling here seems to essentially moot the Article 78 petition for writ of mandamus that Trump filed last week, which would seem to mean that the trial proceeds on Monday.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

1 minute ago, DalTxHornFan said:

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

Well, documents are evidence.  So "no evidence" isn't accurate.  It also appears that the AG used very few if any affidavits, only deposition testimony and documents, to prevail.  Trump filed a lot of affidavits that sure seem not to pass the summary judgment smell test, e.g. hearsay, unsupported conclusions, etc.

[DalTxHornFan 3,084]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, documents are evidence.  So "no evidence" isn't accurate.  It also appears that the AG used very few if any affidavits, only deposition testimony and documents, to prevail.  Trump filed a lot of affidavits that sure seem not to pass the summary judgment smell test, e.g. hearsay, unsupported conclusions, etc.

Well, I get that.  No evidence admitted yet may be a better way to say it.  And I am sure that there will be plenty of defense lawyers and experts doing cross examination, rebuttal and critique of whatever the AG's team will be putting up.

[Pig Bellmont 8,679]

14 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

God damnit. I know you’re trolling but I can’t help it. 
 

What do you think happens in a deposition?  And holy cow your conclusion about evidence before the court. I can’t. Just stop writing about legal issues or trials

[DalTxHornFan 3,084]

3 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

God damnit. I know you’re trolling but I can’t help it. 
 

What do you think happens in a deposition?  And holy cow your conclusion about evidence before the court. I can’t. Just stop writing about legal issues or trials

Who is trolling?  Just because something is used as a deposition exhibit doesn't make it trial evidence.

[Born to Run 6,524]

Unless I misunderstood, the Legal AF folks were saying that in 10 days both parties have to submit three options for receivership, to independently manage the property while preparations for restitution (i.e. state foreclosure and auction) are made after the civil penalties phase of the trial is over; additionally because of the state licensing removal, even if anything is left over after the forced sales (my guess is there won't be), everything will still need to be liquidated.  Bottom line, not only is he done in New York, so are the sons, and everything business related is placed into forced liquidation.  He's always grifted off a shell game of properties, not any more.  
Now they also said that given the severity of this judgment, it should be expected that a stay will be granted on this for judicial review.  While waiting some more makes me anxious, I get that.  However, after reviewing the judge's finding, they both expect appeals to be unsuccessful; and that's coming from 2 lawyers with significant experience in New York law.  

How long would appeals take?

[Gatorubet 30,064]

43 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

So what we have here is the entire universe of courts and legal practitioners - versus the laughably wrong musings of a non-lawyer on a Texas football board. 

May I suggest you stick to appellate bird law in Micronesia?

[BamaATL 16,592]

11 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

10 hours ago, BamaATL said:

Unless I misunderstood, the Legal AF folks were saying that in 10 days both parties have to submit three options for receivership, to independently manage the property while preparations for restitution (i.e. state foreclosure and auction) are made after the civil penalties phase of the trial is over; additionally because of the state licensing removal, even if anything is left over after the forced sales (my guess is there won't be), everything will still need to be liquidated.  Bottom line, not only is he done in New York, so are the sons, and everything business related is placed into forced liquidation.  He's always grifted off a shell game of properties, not any more.  
Now they also said that given the severity of this judgment, it should be expected that a stay will be granted on this for judicial review.  While waiting some more makes me anxious, I get that.  However, after reviewing the judge's finding, they both expect appeals to be unsuccessful; and that's coming from 2 lawyers with significant experience in New York law.  

How long would appeals take?

They only briefly touched on this to the post I listened to, but they did mention 2 things.  I'm not gonna get this entirely right because this isn't my field and it's from memory.  Basically, it can get an immediate appeal with one judge or be advanced to a 5 person panel of judges.  I got the impression that they felt it was better if it went ahead to the five person because it sort of skips a step, and in theory it would leave no where else to go.  New York law has a different set of steps and appeals processes, one that I am not familiar with.  In any event, they were both pretty convinced that any appeal will fail and quickly because there isn't really anything of legal merit to dispute.  

Essentially, Trump's "legal" argument is that his "brand" value overrides actual appraisals, in some cases up to 700%.  The other base argument his attorneys are trying to make is that the state has no right to clawback the money, despite the fraud, because the banks were eventually made whole (probably not true with Trump, but whatever when it comes to legal filings).  The problem with this is of course if you don't punish for kicking the can down the road sort of fraud you are essentially allowing ponzi schemes to operate.  So if I understand this right (admittedly a big if), on one hand his lawyers are arguing no fraud because of Trumps imaginary "brand" value, and then on the other had they are saying, well even if it is fraud you can't take the money.  Lastly, he has some sort of disclosure statement he puts out that basically says in the fine print that all his numbers are bullshit, and let the investor/banker/whoever be ware.  The judge tore that shit completely apart, you can't disclose that you are or potentially are engaged in fraud in the fine print and somehow have that protect you.  

[Sawbonz 27,376]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just for purposes of clarification, you as an individual applying for a mortgage or related loan secured by real property, are subject to conventional bank fraud statutes and likely would be indicted by the feds for lying in a loan application, especially by submitting phony financial statements.

These commercial lending scenarios are a bit different in that there's not a "standard loan application" package, the lenders are more sophisticated, ostensibly, than home mortgage lenders, etc.  So, this is why Trump hasn't been charged with federal bank fraud.

There are some counts in James' petition that attempt to allege this type of more conventional fraud:  Trump falsified, bank relied, bank damaged.  James didn't move for summary judgment on these counts, and, reading between the lines, even Engoron may be skeptical of the viability of these counts, depending on proof at trial.

Section 63(12) encompasses more than just 'bank fraud" or common-law fraud.  In that sense, it is somewhat unusual and I'm not sure analogizing it to conventional bank fraud or common-law fraud is particularly useful.  In fact, Trump and his lawyers continue to attempt to analyze/analogize the case to common-law or bank fraud despite the pretty clear law established by New York courts that 63(12) is much broader than that.

The loans I do are all part of the "private banking" side of the banks I deal with, whether personal or through my business entity. So OK to proceed?

 

ETA of course I will be including very strong, very powerful (maybe even a page and a half's worth) disclaimer language, so they can't say I'm "lying"

Edited September 27, 2023 by Sawbonz

[Js1 85,056]

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

How is the government party to virtually every private business transaction? Unless you mean having to notify the IRS with documentation and payments? Are you suggesting we abolish the IRS?

THATS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT TO DO

[MissingInAction 24,765]

 

 

[The Royal We 3,059]

What possible defense can there be for overstating the square footage of your residence by 3x resulting in ~$200mm in overinflated value used to get a loan? Especially when the "mistake" comes from someone who is supposed to be one of the most savvy real estate investors of all time? AND the actual square footage was public information that was stated in the condo offering documents. You really think think there is a defense to be mounted to stating in a signed/dated financial statement that your penthouse is 30,000 sq ft when it's actually 10,996? This isn't fake or ginned up evidence, it's all coming from Trump Org's own documentation. And this is only one egregious example from the court documents submitted by the NY AG.

THERE'S BEEN NO EVIDENCE OFFERED UP THAT TRUMP DID ANYTHING WRONG!!!!!!!111!!!!! But yea, all of this will just fall apart upon cross examination. GTFOHWTMFBS

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/supplemental-verified-petition-2022-01-18.pdf

[SydneyCarton 47,809]

1 hour ago, DalTxHornFan said:

I appreciate your comments, Twice.  I'm guessing that most of the time that sort of approach is used against some sort of Ponzi scheme or other situations where "civilians" or other consumers have made complaints to the AG seeking relief.

I also note that this ruling was simply made upon the pleadings.  It would appear that there is currently no evidence before the court, certainly none that has been subjected to cross examination or rebuttal.

You're so close to getting it. 

 

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

THATS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT TO DO

I know. I wanted to hear him say it. 

[Sawbonz 27,376]

Jesus christ you have to turn to the View for hard hitting journalist questions

[MissingInAction 24,765]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Jesus christ you have to turn to the View for hard hitting journalist questions

I'm not ashamed that I used to watch it for Megan McCains fat milkers.

[aggie08 21,380]

3 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

I'm not ashamed that I used to watch it for Megan McCains fat milkers.

Maybe, maybe you should be.

[wildcat09 29,187]

1 hour ago, DalTxHornFan said:

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

Buddy, how do you think one cross examines bank records?

['stache 21,744]

1 hour ago, DalTxHornFan said:

But no cross examination or rebuttal -- so no evidence is before the court.

JFC, you are a stupid mother fucker. Summary judgment requires admissible evidence and is a high standard for judgment to be entered without trial. The fact that summary judgment was entered means that not only was there admissible evidence in the record, it was so strong and irrefutable that a trial was deemed unnecessary. It's the complete opposite of what you're implying. Not only was there extensive evidence, trump and his rag tag team of shitty lawyers had no plausible defense. I also read that it was entered prior to a bench trial, meaning that the case would have been tried to the judge anyway without a jury. It means he waived the right to a jury trial. But keep "just asking questions," lol. 

Edited September 27, 2023 by 'stache

[aggie08 21,380]

At least I'm smart enough to realize that I don't fully understand the inner workings of the legal system and keep my mouth shut. Jesus Christ.

You are in a cult.

[sidis 9,713]

twicehorn, i have some recollection of you saying daltx did something similar to me for a career?

if so, this page is alarmingly stupid.

[Beau Vine 53,965]

14 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

But he'll probably re-charter in Florida or Texas and that's going to cost him millions in legal and professional fees.

Which he won't pay.

[Gatorubet 30,064]

52 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You're so close to getting it. 

If they had allowed cross examination it would’ve showed his name was NOT Ponzi! Advantage, Orange Man!

[Beau Vine 53,965]

2 hours ago, DalTxHornFan said:

It would appear that there is currently no evidence before the court,

So you're not a lawyer, huh?

 

[Red Five 40,593]

This all reminds me of a Trumper cousin I have. He's always saying things like "Look, I don't necessarily like everything the guy does, but it doesn't look like they have anything against him..."

Me: "91 felony counts in four cases. Not counting his rape trial."

Him: "Yeah just not seeing the evidence...."

[The Royal We 3,059]

15 minutes ago, Red Five said:

This all reminds me of a Trumper cousin I have. He's always saying things like "Look, I don't necessarily like everything the guy does, but it doesn't look like they have anything against him..."

Me: "91 felony counts in four cases. Not counting his rape trial."

Him: "Yeah just not seeing the evidence...."

If the evidence isn't talked about on Fox News or mentioned in their Facebook Echo Chamber of Bullshit, did it even really happen?

(No. No, it didn't happen.)

[Ted Lange 15,991]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wildcat09 29,187]

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, I think what's happening to the now-banned entities is simply dissolution.  As we know, that can be done rather painlessly on a voluntary basis.  You're just shutting down a corporation/LLC for whatever reasons.

But this is INVOLUNTARY, court-ordered dissolution.  And, as such, a receiver is appointed, not to sell off assets for the benefit of creditors, but to supervise the dissolution and ending of business of the entity, making sure taxes are paid, creditors are taken care of, etc.  And when I say "creditors are taken care of," I don't really mean paid off, just that the obligations are transferred to the new entit(ies).

So, this is going to be a colossal and expensive pain in the ass, but it's not a liquidation of Trumpco assets or anything.

I do imagine that this judgment, and the associated ordered dissolutions would probably trigger loan covenants entitling many lenders to foreclose.  But, as you note, that would probably not be a wise thing for lenders to do, as it rarely is in big commercial lending scenarios.

I don't follow you here. A fundamental part of the process of dissolving any business entity is protecting creditors. Usually they're just paid, but I believe reserves can be established to protect them if they're not paid immediately. 

Why would the state of New York allow Trump Fraud Org 2 LLC, a NY LLC, assign its liabilities to Trump Fraud Org 2 LLC, a FL LLC? Could it even require the new FL LLC to assume those liabilities? 

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

2 hours ago, Born to Run said:

13 hours ago, BamaATL said:

Unless I misunderstood, the Legal AF folks were saying that in 10 days both parties have to submit three options for receivership, to independently manage the property while preparations for restitution (i.e. state foreclosure and auction) are made after the civil penalties phase of the trial is over; additionally because of the state licensing removal, even if anything is left over after the forced sales (my guess is there won't be), everything will still need to be liquidated.  Bottom line, not only is he done in New York, so are the sons, and everything business related is placed into forced liquidation.  He's always grifted off a shell game of properties, not any more.  
Now they also said that given the severity of this judgment, it should be expected that a stay will be granted on this for judicial review.  While waiting some more makes me anxious, I get that.  However, after reviewing the judge's finding, they both expect appeals to be unsuccessful; and that's coming from 2 lawyers with significant experience in New York law.  

How long would appeals take?

About a year at the first level, another year if appealed further and that's only if leave granted (somewhat like certiorari).

[Neonmoon 38,127]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

JFC, you are a stupid mother fucker. Summary judgment requires admissible evidence and is a high standard for judgment to be entered without trial. The fact that summary judgment was entered means that not only was there admissible evidence in the record, it was so strong and irrefutable that a trial was deemed unnecessary. It's the complete opposite of what you're implying. Not only was there extensive evidence, trump and his rag tag team of shitty lawyers had no plausible defense. I also read that it was entered prior to a bench trial, meaning that the case would have been tried to the judge anyway without a jury. It means he waived the right to a jury trial. But keep "just asking questions," lol. 

Here is how the cross-examination would go

 

Prosecutor: Is it true that the actual square footage for Trump's condo is 10,996 and not 30,000?

Appraiser: Correct. 

Prosecutor: No further questions

(Cross-Examination)

Trump Lawyers: Did you measure the condo?

Appraiser: Yes

Trump Lawyer: So you're one of those numbers weirdos.

Appraiser: What?

Trump Lawyer: Do you think numbers should control us?

 

 

[cactusflinthead 27,593]

 

[Red Five 40,593]

"Look, it's worth somewhere between $26 million and $1.8 billion. Depending on how we feel in that moment. What's the problem?? Stop being dicks ok." 

[Neonmoon 38,127]

26 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Okay, I'm dumb

Every single person fights the tax appraiser to pay less taxes. 

Every single person sells their home for loads more money than what the tax assessor says their property is worth. 

That being said, saying your condo is 30,000 square feet while it's 10,996 is plain fraud. 

Edited September 27, 2023 by Neonmoon
I am dumb

[SydneyCarton 47,809]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Okay, this attack is dumb. 

Every single person fights the tax appraiser to pay less taxes. 

Every single person sells their home for loads more money than what the tax assessor says their property is worth. 

That being said, saying your condo is 30,000 square feet while it's 10,996 is plain fraud. 

It's not dumb. People fight property taxes to keep them within spitting distance of where they are, year to year. But they don't turn around and claim it's 60x the taxable value and then ask for, and recieve, loans based on that valuation. That's fucking fraud. No one is attacking him for trying to pay lower property taxes. They're attacking him for his outright lies and falsehoods he and his shit kids are spewing. Almost like it's a pattern. 

[YGIFS 19,449]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Okay, this attack is dumb. 

Every single person fights the tax appraiser to pay less taxes. 

Every single person sells their home for loads more money than what the tax assessor says their property is worth. 

That being said, saying your condo is 30,000 square feet while it's 10,996 is plain fraud. 

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/01adf2b4-298e-4013-8f49-abf6578556f5

[Neonmoon 38,127]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

It's not dumb. People fight property taxes to keep them within spitting distance of where they are, year to year. But they don't turn around and claim it's 60x the taxable value and then ask for, and recieve, loans based on that valuation. That's fucking fraud. No one is attacking him for trying to pay lower property taxes. They're attacking him for his outright lies and falsehoods he and his shit kids are spewing. Almost like it's a pattern. 

That's fair. The tax value is always low compared to what you can really sell it for, but yeah, it's not 2 or 3 or 100 times more valuable. 

[Neonmoon 38,127]

He also used the 28 million valuation to report a 3 million loss that lowered his tax burden

[Kyrie Eleison 9,312]

On 9/9/2023 at 4:33 PM, TexasHooch said:

That commercial makes the med seem pretty fun, right up to the point where they admit it could rot your taint.

[The Royal We 3,059]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Okay, this attack is dumb. 

Every single person fights the tax appraiser to pay less taxes. 

Every single person sells their home for loads more money than what the tax assessor says their property is worth. 

That being said, saying your condo is 30,000 square feet while it's 10,996 is plain fraud. 

That's my thought too. There's no need to embellish this shit, it's plenty fraudulent all on its own.

More examples of blatant fraud that no reasonable person could ever consider an honest mistake:

Quote

Another example, according to the OAG, concerns Trump’s golf course in Scotland. The Trump Organization purchased the property in 2006 for $12.6 million. Trump’s 2014 financial statement valued the property at more than $435 million—a return of nearly 3500% in eight years. Given that no cache of oil was discovered on the property in the interim, it is unsurprising that the OAG alleges that some underhanded accounting was at work.

According to Trump’s financial statements, the Trump Organization had received planning permission in 2008 for “a residential village consisting of 950 holiday homes and 500 single family residences and 36 golf villas.” Only the 500 single-family residences would be available for individual purchase—the rest were to be short-term rental properties. According to a 2017 appraisal commissioned by the Trump Organization, 557 private homes would result in a net present value profit of £16–19 million ($18–21.5 million). Yet the undeveloped land was valued at more than ten times that amount in Trump’s financial statements.

Even when they actually had an appraisal instead of just vibes Trump still couldn't use a plausible value.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

7 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

I don't follow you here. A fundamental part of the process of dissolving any business entity is protecting creditors. Usually they're just paid, but I believe reserves can be established to protect them if they're not paid immediately. 

Why would the state of New York allow Trump Fraud Org 2 LLC, a NY LLC, assign its liabilities to Trump Fraud Org 2 LLC, a FL LLC? Could it even require the new FL LLC to assume those liabilities? 

I mean you are correct, all of the obligations of the dissolved entity must be satisfied, but that doesn't necessarily mean that assets are liquidated for that purpose.  An executory obligation can be assigned, presumably with creditor consent.

ETA:  Sure, creditors with liquidated, currently due debts must be paid off, but things like leases, mortgages, notes can be assigned to the successor business.  And, I think the receiver's/New York judiciaries main concern is that the successor entity not be registered to do business in NY (or, possibly, registered to do business in NY, but not controlled by Trump).

Edited September 28, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[YGIFS 19,449]

Executory Obligation?  Like Future Interest?  You're about 2 posts away from the Rule Against Perpetuities, aren't you mother fucker?  Commie bastard!