New York Attorney General Letitia James’s office is seeking to exclude four expert witnesses former President Donald Trump plans to call on to testify in next week’s trial, arguing the judge has already ruled President Trump liable for fraud.
The state attorneys argue in a letter to New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron that their testimonies “are no longer relevant.”
At the center of the case are the Trump Organization statements of financial condition (SFC) prepared every year to give a summary of President Trump’s net worth and asset values. The attorney general’s office is arguing that these figures were inflated up to $2.2 billion a year total, and the judge has ruled in their favor in a pretrial summary judgment.
Defense attorneys are arguing that these figures, though they may differ from the attorney general’s calculations, are legitimate and not a result of fraud.
Experts
Mr. Laposa is a real estate executive with 30 years of experience in commercial real estate, construction management, economic consulting, and is a professor who was previously the president of the American Real Estate Society.Defense attorneys submitted an affidavit and report by Mr. Laposa earlier this year, and he is expected to testify on property valuations and the methodologies used to reach different numbers.
The state attorneys note that, according to his report, he will also testify on how “appraising a trophy property presents unique challenges that explain disparate valuations between an appraiser and owner,” possibly to address how the attorney general came to different valuations of President Trump’s properties than what is shown on Trump Organization statements of financial condition.
A widely reported figure concerning the case has been the attorney general’s $18 million valuation of Mar-a-Lago, in which she relied on county assessor numbers, which real estate professionals say have nothing to do with valuation.
Mr. Flemmons is a CPA with 25 years in forensic accounting, auditing, and corporate investigations. Defense attorneys had submitted a report by Mr. Flemmons where he disclosed standard practices in accounting, which allows for exceptions to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and how even under GAAP financial statements prepared by different parties on the same assets can still vary.
Mr. Flemmons had stated that, in his expert opinion, the attorney general’s office reached their valuations based on “flawed accounting analyses,” not GAAP as the petition asserts. He also makes reference to the disclaimer on the SFCs, which President Trump has often brought up in his public comments. The disclaimer statement asks banks and others to do their own analyses.
Mr. Witkoff is a real estate investor who was designated as a rebuttal witness to the attorney general’s valuation experts Constantine Korologos and Laurence Hirsh. He is expected to testify on the valuation of the Doral golf course in Miami, and 40 Wall Street, both of which he says the previous experts undervalued by ignoring several factors.
Overvaluation?
All of these experts are meant to contest the issue of valuation in the SFCs, but state attorneys pointed out that the judge has already resolved that claim by ruling that there was “clear, indisputable documentary evidence” proving President Trump “overvalued the assets reported in the SFCs” in the Sept. 26 summary judgement.- Trump Tower triplex penthouse, in 2012 to 2016
- Seven Springs, in 2014
- rent stabilized apartments at Trump Park Avenue, from 2014 to 2021
- 40 Wall Street, in 2011, 2012, and 2015
- Mar-a-Lago, from 2014 to 2021
- Aberdeen, from 2014 to 2019
- other golf courses from, 2014 to 2020
- cash, from 2013 to 2021
- Vordano partnership properties, from 2014 to 2016, and in 2021
- licensing deals, from 2014 to 2018, and 2020 to 2021
“The Court noted in the Decision that the only issues remaining for trial were Plaintiff’s illegality claims under § 63(12) (the second through seventh causes of action, which require additional proof of intent to defraud), the amount of disgorgement, and a determination on the third through ninth prayers for equitable relief sought in the Complaint.”
President Trump has maintained that he did nothing wrong, and that the asset values were not “inflated” in the SFCs.
During his testimony, he conceded that some of those figures were “high,” but that he believed he could make a deal even higher than the SFC valuations.
If the judge rules for the state attorneys and prohibits the expert witnesses from testifying, it is likely to further the defense attorneys’ claims of bias, seeing as he allowed expert witnesses from the attorney general’s side after defense objections.
